[Bug 1380826] Review Request: pgadmin4 - Management tool for PostgreSQL

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1380826



--- Comment #25 from Itamar Reis Peixoto  ---
*** Bug 1352188 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1380826] Review Request: pgadmin4 - Management tool for PostgreSQL

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1380826
Bug 1380826 depends on bug 1352188, which changed state.

Bug 1352188 Summary: FutureFeature: Package PGAdmin4
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1352188

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572105] Review Request: R-listenv - Environments Behaving (Almost) as Lists

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572105

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |MODIFIED



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572105] Review Request: R-listenv - Environments Behaving (Almost) as Lists

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572105



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
R-listenv-0.7.0-1.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-8c9130b951

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572007] Review Request: R-colorspace - Color Space Manipulation

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572007

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |MODIFIED



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572007] Review Request: R-colorspace - Color Space Manipulation

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572007



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
R-colorspace-1.3.2-1.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-af1b5d7d11

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1571757] Review Request: squeezelite - Headless music player for streaming from Logitech Media Server

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1571757



--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System  ---
squeezelite-1.8.7.1083-6.20180426git8386ece.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora
28 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in
this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-c3f4cbd7c9

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572105] Review Request: R-listenv - Environments Behaving (Almost) as Lists

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572105



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
R-colorspace-1.3.2-1.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 testing repository.
If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-af1b5d7d11

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572007] Review Request: R-colorspace - Color Space Manipulation

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572007

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
R-listenv-0.7.0-1.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 testing repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-8c9130b951

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572007] Review Request: R-colorspace - Color Space Manipulation

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572007



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
R-colorspace-1.3.2-1.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-45fabf4b35

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572105] Review Request: R-listenv - Environments Behaving (Almost) as Lists

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572105

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
R-colorspace-1.3.2-1.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 testing repository.
If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-45fabf4b35

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1571757] Review Request: squeezelite - Headless music player for streaming from Logitech Media Server

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1571757

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System  ---
squeezelite-1.8.7.1083-6.20180426git8386ece.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora
27 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in
this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-f9583ca10a

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572826] New: Review Request: python-Pallets-Sphinx-Themes - Sphinx themes for Pallets and related projects

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572826

Bug ID: 1572826
   Summary: Review Request: python-Pallets-Sphinx-Themes - Sphinx
themes for Pallets and related projects
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: rel...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL:
https://codeblock.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-Pallets-Sphinx-Themes/python-Pallets-Sphinx-Themes.spec
SRPM URL:
https://codeblock.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-Pallets-Sphinx-Themes/python-Pallets-Sphinx-Themes-1.0.0-1.fc27.src.rpm
Description: Pallets Sphinx Themes Themes for the Pallets projects.
Fedora Account System Username: codeblock

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572821] New: Review Request: nodejs-to-array - Turn an array like into an array

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572821

Bug ID: 1572821
   Summary: Review Request: nodejs-to-array - Turn an array like
into an array
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: jsmith.fed...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Blocks: 956806 (nodejs-reviews)



Spec URL:
https://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/nodejs-to-array/nodejs-to-array.spec
SRPM URL:
https://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/nodejs-to-array/nodejs-to-array-0.1.4-1.fc29.src.rpm
Description: Turn an array like into an array
Fedora Account System Username: jsmith


Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956806
[Bug 956806] Node.js Review Tracker
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572815] New: Review Request: nodejs-socket-dot-io-parser - A socket.io protocol parser

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572815

Bug ID: 1572815
   Summary: Review Request: nodejs-socket-dot-io-parser - A
socket.io protocol parser
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: jsmith.fed...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Blocks: 956806 (nodejs-reviews)



Spec URL:
https://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/nodejs-socket-dot-io-parser/nodejs-socket-dot-io-parser.spec
SRPM URL:
https://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/nodejs-socket-dot-io-parser/nodejs-socket-dot-io-parser-3.2.0-1.fc29.src.rpm
Description: A socket.io protocol parser
Fedora Account System Username: jsmith


Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956806
[Bug 956806] Node.js Review Tracker
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572810] New: Review Request: nodejs-engine-dot-io - The realtime engine behind Socket.IO

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572810

Bug ID: 1572810
   Summary: Review Request: nodejs-engine-dot-io - The realtime
engine behind Socket.IO
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: jsmith.fed...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Blocks: 956806 (nodejs-reviews)



Spec URL:
https://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/nodejs-engine-dot-io/nodejs-engine-dot-io.spec
SRPM URL:
https://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/nodejs-engine-dot-io/nodejs-engine-dot-io-3.2.0-1.fc29.src.rpm
Description: The realtime engine behind Socket.IO
Fedora Account System Username: jsmith


Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956806
[Bug 956806] Node.js Review Tracker
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572486] Review Request: R-rex - Friendly Regular Expressions

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572486



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
R-rex-1.1.2-1.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-66d76cbba0

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572486] Review Request: R-rex - Friendly Regular Expressions

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572486



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
R-rex-1.1.2-1.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-1a1fce1179

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572486] Review Request: R-rex - Friendly Regular Expressions

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572486

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|MODIFIED



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572486] Review Request: R-rex - Friendly Regular Expressions

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572486



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
R-rex-1.1.2-1.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-9c172433cc

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572803] Review Request: nodejs-ng-classify - Compile CoffeeScript classes to AngularJS modules

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572803

Jared Smith  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1572806




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572806
[Bug 1572806] Review Request: nodejs-gulp-ng-classify - Compile
CoffeeScript classes to AngularJS modules
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1568877] Review Request: perl-File-Copy-Recursive-Reduced - Recursive copying of files and directories within Perl 5 toolchain

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1568877



--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-File-Copy-Recursive-Reduced-0.003-1.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27
stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this
bug report.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572461] Review Request: R-munsell - Utilities for Using Munsell Colours

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572461



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
R-munsell-0.4.3-1.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-da3dfb9031

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572461] Review Request: R-munsell - Utilities for Using Munsell Colours

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572461



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
R-munsell-0.4.3-1.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-49ab05284e

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572779] Review Request: nodejs-node-dot-extend - A port of jQuery.extend that actually works on node.js

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572779

Jared Smith  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1572803




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572803
[Bug 1572803] Review Request: nodejs-ng-classify - Compile CoffeeScript
classes to AngularJS modules
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572461] Review Request: R-munsell - Utilities for Using Munsell Colours

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572461



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
R-munsell-0.4.3-1.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-7848dbf329

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572657] Review Request: nodejs-loophole - A hack to enable use of libraries that depend on a basic form of eval in Atom

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572657

Jared Smith  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1572803




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572803
[Bug 1572803] Review Request: nodejs-ng-classify - Compile CoffeeScript
classes to AngularJS modules
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572461] Review Request: R-munsell - Utilities for Using Munsell Colours

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572461

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|MODIFIED



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572806] New: Review Request: nodejs-gulp-ng-classify - Compile CoffeeScript classes to AngularJS modules

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572806

Bug ID: 1572806
   Summary: Review Request: nodejs-gulp-ng-classify - Compile
CoffeeScript classes to AngularJS modules
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: jsmith.fed...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Depends On: 1572803
Blocks: 956806 (nodejs-reviews)



Spec URL:
https://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/nodejs-gulp-ng-classify/nodejs-gulp-ng-classify.spec
SRPM URL:
https://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/nodejs-gulp-ng-classify/nodejs-gulp-ng-classify-4.0.1-1.fc29.src.rpm
Description: Compile CoffeeScript classes to AngularJS modules
Fedora Account System Username: jsmith


Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956806
[Bug 956806] Node.js Review Tracker
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572803
[Bug 1572803] Review Request: nodejs-ng-classify - Compile CoffeeScript
classes to AngularJS modules
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1568877] Review Request: perl-File-Copy-Recursive-Reduced - Recursive copying of files and directories within Perl 5 toolchain

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1568877



--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-File-Copy-Recursive-Reduced-0.003-1.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26
stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this
bug report.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1380826] Review Request: pgadmin4 - Management tool for PostgreSQL

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1380826



--- Comment #24 from Joseph D. Wagner  ---
My guess is that bug #1352188 is a duplicate of this bug.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572803] New: Review Request: nodejs-ng-classify - Compile CoffeeScript classes to AngularJS modules

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572803

Bug ID: 1572803
   Summary: Review Request: nodejs-ng-classify - Compile
CoffeeScript classes to AngularJS modules
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: jsmith.fed...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Depends On: 1572657, 1572779
Blocks: 956806 (nodejs-reviews)



Spec URL:
https://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/nodejs-ng-classify/nodejs-ng-classify.spec
SRPM URL:
https://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/nodejs-ng-classify/nodejs-ng-classify-4.1.1-1.fc29.src.rpm
Description: Compile CoffeeScript classes to AngularJS modules
Fedora Account System Username: jsmith


Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956806
[Bug 956806] Node.js Review Tracker
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572657
[Bug 1572657] Review Request: nodejs-loophole - A hack to enable use of
libraries that depend on a basic form of eval in Atom
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572779
[Bug 1572779] Review Request: nodejs-node-dot-extend - A port of
jQuery.extend that actually works on node.js
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1504825] Review Request: R-RColorBrewer - Provides color schemes for maps (and other graphics)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1504825

Elliott Sales de Andrade  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||billcrawford1970@googlemail
   ||.com
  Flags||needinfo?(billcrawford1970@
   ||googlemail.com)



--- Comment #9 from Elliott Sales de Andrade  ---
Are you still interested in packaging this?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572375] Review Request: sos-collector - renaming the clustersos package

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572375



--- Comment #9 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/sos-collector

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572580] Review Request: gegl04 - Graph based image processing framework

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572580



--- Comment #9 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gegl04

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572486] Review Request: R-rex - Friendly Regular Expressions

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572486



--- Comment #3 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/R-rex

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572459] Review Request: R-future - Unified Parallel and Distributed Processing in R for Everyone

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572459



--- Comment #3 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/R-future

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572461] Review Request: R-munsell - Utilities for Using Munsell Colours

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572461



--- Comment #3 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/R-munsell

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572779] New: Review Request: nodejs-node-dot-extend - A port of jQuery.extend that actually works on node.js

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572779

Bug ID: 1572779
   Summary: Review Request: nodejs-node-dot-extend - A port of
jQuery.extend that actually works on node.js
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: jsmith.fed...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Blocks: 956806 (nodejs-reviews), 1572709 (mozgw)



Spec URL:
https://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/nodejs-node-dot-extend/nodejs-node-dot-extend.spec
SRPM URL:
https://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/nodejs-node-dot-extend/nodejs-node-dot-extend-2.0.0-1.fc29.src.rpm
Description: A port of jQuery.extend that actually works on node.js
Fedora Account System Username: jsmith


Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956806
[Bug 956806] Node.js Review Tracker
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572709
[Bug 1572709] Tracker for Mozilla IoT Gateway on Fedora
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572375] Review Request: sos-collector - renaming the clustersos package

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572375

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #8 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
Ok, package approved.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572580] Review Request: gegl04 - Graph based image processing framework

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572580



--- Comment #8 from Nils Philippsen  ---
Thanks!

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572375] Review Request: sos-collector - renaming the clustersos package

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572375



--- Comment #7 from Jake Hunsaker  ---
Ok, I've corrected the versioning to follow from clustersos, and removed the
dependency generator instead going with static Requires.

Fixed the typo in the Source0 link.

https://github.com/sosreport/sos-collector/blob/master/sos-collector.spec

http://people.redhat.com/jhunsake/sos-collector/sos-collector-1.3.tar.gz

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572580] Review Request: gegl04 - Graph based image processing framework

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572580

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #7 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
Good to go, package approved.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572580] Review Request: gegl04 - Graph based image processing framework

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572580



--- Comment #6 from Nils Philippsen  ---
Fixed:

* Fri Apr 27 2018 Nils Philippsen  - 0.4.0-0.4
- own all created directories
- remove rpaths

Spec URL: https://nphilipp.fedorapeople.org/review/gegl04/gegl04.spec
SRPM URL:
https://nphilipp.fedorapeople.org/review/gegl04/gegl04-0.4.0-0.4.fc28.src.rpm

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572375] Review Request: sos-collector - renaming the clustersos package

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572375



--- Comment #6 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
   Yes, I believe it should have continued the versioning where it was left off
before the rename. Alternatively you could set a fictional fixed Provides with
a version superior to Obsoletes:

Provides: clustersos = 1.3-1
Obsoletes: clustersos < 1.2.2-2

   This will work too.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572375] Review Request: sos-collector - renaming the clustersos package

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572375



--- Comment #5 from Jake Hunsaker  ---
(In reply to Robert-André Mauchin from comment #4)
>  - The obsolete/provides info I have given you are wrong. Provides should be
> > to Obsoletes but you reset the versionning with the rename. See
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Renaming.
> 2FReplacing_Existing_Packages
> 

So if I understand correctly instead of setting sos-collector back to 1.0, it
should be (e.g.) 1.3 from the get-go? I don't have a problem with this, just
want to make sure this gets handled properly.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572375] Review Request: sos-collector - renaming the clustersos package

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572375



--- Comment #4 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
 - %?python_enable_dependency_generator won't work on EL, only in F28+

 - Source0 is 404 for me, it seems the correct URL is:

Source0:
http://people.redhat.com/jhunsake/sos-collector/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz

 - The obsolete/provides info I have given you are wrong. Provides should be >
to Obsoletes but you reset the versionning with the rename. See
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Renaming.2FReplacing_Existing_Packages


Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed



= MUST items =

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 11 files have
 unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
 /home/bob/packaging/review/sos-collector/review-sos-
 collector/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
 license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
 license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
 provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
 %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
 process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
 provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
 file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
 translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
 architectures.
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
 files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the 

[Bug 1572580] Review Request: gegl04 - Graph based image processing framework

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572580



--- Comment #5 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
 - Package should own these derctories:

[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/vala/vapi,
 /usr/share/gir-1.0, /usr/share/vala

 - You must remove Rpath from the libs:

[!]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
 Note: See rpmlint output

   Try using chrpath. See
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Removing_Rpath

Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed



= MUST items =

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[!]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
 Note: See rpmlint output
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
 Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
 attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "GPL", "FSF All Permissive", "GPL (v3 or later)", "Unknown or
 generated", "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "*No copyright* GPL (v3 or later)",
 "*No copyright* Public domain", "BSD (3 clause)", "GPL (v3 or later)
 LGPL (v3 or later)", "LGPL (v3 or later)", "*No copyright* LGPL (v3 or
 later)", "ISC", "GPL (v3)", "LGPL (v2 or later)". 640 files have
 unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
 /home/bob/packaging/review/gegl04/review-gegl04/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/vala/vapi,
 /usr/share/gir-1.0, /usr/share/vala
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
 Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/share/gtk-doc(harfbuzz-
 devel, intel-gpu-tools), /usr/share/gtk-doc/html(harfbuzz-devel,
 intel-gpu-tools), /usr/share/gtk-doc/html/gegl(gegl-devel)
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: The spec file handles locales properly.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
 license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
 license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
 provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
 %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc 

[Bug 1558683] Review Request: python-ucsmsdk - Python SDK for Cisco UCSM

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1558683



--- Comment #8 from Sandhya Dasu  ---
Spec URL: https://github.com/sadasu/ucsmsdk-rpm/blob/master/python-ucsmsdk.spec
SRPM URL:
https://github.com/sadasu/ucsmsdk-rpm/blob/master/python-ucsmsdk-0.9.3.1-1.el7.src.rpm
Description: SRPM and .spec files for python-ucsmsdk version 0.9.3.1 to be
added as a new package to Fedora.
Fedora Account System Username: sdasu

Hope this is what is expected from us.

Thanks,
Sandhya

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1571404] Review Request: geolite2 - Free IP geolocation databases

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1571404



--- Comment #9 from Carl George  ---
There's no reason not to package it, but I don't think it should be part of
this spec file.  I'm using the release date as the version, and the ASN
database is released on a different schedule than the City and Country
databases.  From the download page:

> The GeoLite2 Country and City databases are updated on the first Tuesday of 
> each month. The GeoLite2 ASN database is updated every Tuesday.

The content disposition header of the download links confirms this.

Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=GeoLite2-City_20180403.tar.gz
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=GeoLite2-Country_20180403.tar.gz
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=GeoLite2-ASN_20180424.tar.gz

A separate geolite2-asn package (starting at version 20180424) would make sense
to me, but I don't need it myself so someone else can submit/maintain it.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1517451] Review Request: gnome-internet-radio-locator

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1517451



--- Comment #14 from MartinKG  ---
1. please remove %post from the spec file

2. please change the description in the %changelog section to

%changelog
* Fri Apr 27 2018 Ole Aamot  - 1.1.3-1
- Update to 1.1.3

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1571404] Review Request: geolite2 - Free IP geolocation databases

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1571404

nucleo  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||alekc...@googlemail.com



--- Comment #8 from nucleo  ---
Is there reason to not package GeoLite2-ASN?
http://geolite.maxmind.com/download/geoip/database/GeoLite2-ASN.tar.gz

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572580] Review Request: gegl04 - Graph based image processing framework

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572580



--- Comment #4 from Nils Philippsen  ---
(In reply to Robert-André Mauchin from comment #3)
>  - Use %ldconfig_scriptlets instead of: 
> 
> %post -p /sbin/ldconfig
> 
> %postun -p /sbin/ldconfig

Fixed:

* Fri Apr 27 2018 Nils Philippsen  - 0.4.0-0.3
- use %%ldconfig_scriptlets macro

Spec URL: https://nphilipp.fedorapeople.org/review/gegl04/gegl04.spec
SRPM URL:
https://nphilipp.fedorapeople.org/review/gegl04/gegl04-0.4.0-0.3.fc28.src.rpm

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1517451] Review Request: gnome-internet-radio-locator

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1517451



--- Comment #13 from o...@gnome.org ---
Spec URL:
https://people.gnome.org/~ole/testing/SPECS/gnome-internet-radio-locator.spec
SRPM URL:
https://people.gnome.org/~ole/testing/SRPMS/gnome-internet-radio-locator-1.1.3-1.fc28.src.rpm

Build for rawhide on koji:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=26593257

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1558683] Review Request: python-ucsmsdk - Python SDK for Cisco UCSM

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1558683

Sandhya Dasu  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?(sad...@cisco.com) |



--- Comment #7 from Sandhya Dasu  ---
I created an Fedora packer account (sdasu) successfully. I have created the
spec file here: https://github.com/sadasu/ucsmsdk-rpm

Could you please provide me a link to instructions to build the RPM itself?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572375] Review Request: sos-collector - renaming the clustersos package

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572375



--- Comment #3 from Jake Hunsaker  ---
I've updated the spec file with your suggestions. The new version also includes
logic to allow EL builds for python2, but Fedora remains a python3 build.


New spec file:
https://github.com/sosreport/sos-collector/blob/master/sos-collector.spec

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572675] Review Request: ansible-role-container-registry - Ansible role to configure Docker + Registry for TripleO

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572675

Javier Peña  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jp...@redhat.com
  Flags||rdo-review+



--- Comment #2 from Javier Peña  ---
Review notes:

- The tarball generation and %define in spec are expected, since the source RPM
was generated by DLRN.

Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed



= MUST items =

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "Apache (v2.0)", "*No copyright* Apache", "Unknown or
 generated", "*No copyright* Apache (v2.0)". 24 files have unknown
 license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /tmp/ansible-role-
 container-registry/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
 Note: No known owner of /usr/share/ansible
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/ansible,
 /usr/lib/python2.7, /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
 license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
 license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
 that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
 provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
 %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
 file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented.
 Note: Package contains tarball without URL, check comments
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
 translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
 architectures.
[-]: %check is 

[Bug 1572070] Review Request: pass-otp - A pass extension for managing one-time-password (OTP) tokens

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572070



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
pass-otp-1.1.0-2.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 testing repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-1d308fc5f6

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572675] Review Request: ansible-role-container-registry - Ansible role to configure Docker + Registry for TripleO

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572675

Javier Peña  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||jp...@redhat.com



--- Comment #1 from Javier Peña  ---
Initial licensecheck output:

$ licensecheck -r .
./.gitreview: *No copyright* UNKNOWN
./LICENSE: *No copyright* Apache (v2.0)
./README.md: *No copyright* UNKNOWN
./ansible-requirements.txt: *No copyright* UNKNOWN
./ansible.cfg: *No copyright* UNKNOWN
./requirements.txt: *No copyright* UNKNOWN
./setup.cfg: *No copyright* Apache
./setup.py: Apache (v2.0)
./test-requirements.txt: *No copyright* UNKNOWN
./tox.ini: *No copyright* UNKNOWN
./ci-scripts/ansible-lint.sh: *No copyright* UNKNOWN
./defaults/main.yml: *No copyright* UNKNOWN
./handlers/main.yml: *No copyright* UNKNOWN
./meta/main.yml: *No copyright* UNKNOWN
./tasks/docker-distribution.yml: *No copyright* UNKNOWN
./tasks/docker.yml: *No copyright* UNKNOWN
./tasks/main.yml: *No copyright* UNKNOWN
./templates/docker-daemon.json.j2: *No copyright* UNKNOWN
./templates/docker-distribution-config.yml.j2: *No copyright* UNKNOWN
./tests/inventory: *No copyright* UNKNOWN
./tests/test.yml: *No copyright* UNKNOWN
./vars/main.yml: *No copyright* UNKNOWN

The package is licensed with the Apache 2.0 license.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572657] Review Request: nodejs-loophole - A hack to enable use of libraries that depend on a basic form of eval in Atom

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572657

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
 CC||zebo...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
 - Latest version packaged
 - License ok
 - Builds in Mock
 - No rpmlint errors
 - Conforms to the Packaging Guidelines

Package approved.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1517451] Review Request: gnome-internet-radio-locator

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1517451

MartinKG  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mgans...@online.de
  Flags||fedora-review?



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1517451] Review Request: gnome-internet-radio-locator

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1517451



--- Comment #12 from MartinKG  ---
please remove executing gtk-update-icon-cache in %post/%postu/%postrans to
update hicolor theme cache

All those scriptles are no longer needed because in hicolor-icon-theme
package has file triggers updating theme cache on any change in single
dnf/rpm transaction.

https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/736

remove this part from the spec file:

/bin/touch --no-create %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor &>/dev/null || :

%postun
if [ $1 -eq 0 ] ; then
/bin/touch --no-create %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor &>/dev/null
/usr/bin/gtk-update-icon-cache %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor &>/dev/null || :
fi

%posttrans
/usr/bin/gtk-update-icon-cache %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor &>/dev/null || :

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572675] Review Request: ansible-role-container-registry - Ansible role to configure Docker + Registry for TripleO

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572675

Alfredo Moralejo  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Target Release|--- |trunk
 CC||amora...@redhat.com
  Component|Package Review  |Package Review
Version|rawhide |trunk
 Blocks||1550514 (RDO-ROCKY)
Product|Fedora  |RDO




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1550514
[Bug 1550514] Tracker: Blockers and Review requests for new RDO Rocky
packages
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572675] New: Review Request: ansible-role-container-registry - Ansible role to configure Docker + Registry for TripleO

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572675

Bug ID: 1572675
   Summary: Review Request: ansible-role-container-registry -
Ansible role to configure Docker + Registry for
TripleO
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: emac...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Description: ansible-role-container-registry - Ansible role to configure Docker
+ Registry for TripleO 
Fedora Account System Username: none

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572580] Review Request: gegl04 - Graph based image processing framework

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572580

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||zebo...@gmail.com



--- Comment #3 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
 - Use %ldconfig_scriptlets instead of: 

%post -p /sbin/ldconfig

%postun -p /sbin/ldconfig

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572486] Review Request: R-rex - Friendly Regular Expressions

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572486

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
 CC||zebo...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
Package approved.

Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed


Issues:
===
- Package have the default element marked as %%doc :doc, DESCRIPTION


= MUST items =

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "Unknown or generated". 65 files have unknown license. Detailed
 output of licensecheck in
 /home/bob/packaging/review/R-rex/review-R-rex/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
 license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
 license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
 provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
 %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

R:
[x]: Package contains the mandatory BuildRequires.
[x]: The package has the standard %install section.
[x]: Package requires R-core.

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
 file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
 translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
 architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
 files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, 

[Bug 1517451] Review Request: gnome-internet-radio-locator

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1517451



--- Comment #11 from o...@gnome.org ---
Spec URL:
https://people.gnome.org/~ole/testing/SPECS/gnome-internet-radio-locator.spec
SRPM URL:
https://people.gnome.org/~ole/testing/SRPMS/gnome-internet-radio-locator-1.1.2-1.fc28.src.rpm

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572459] Review Request: R-future - Unified Parallel and Distributed Processing in R for Everyone

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572459

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
 CC||zebo...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
Package approved.


Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed


Issues:
===
- Package have the default element marked as %%doc :doc, DESCRIPTION, NEWS


= MUST items =

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
 license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
 license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "Unknown or generated". 197 files have unknown license.
 Detailed output of licensecheck in
 /home/bob/packaging/review/R-future/review-R-future/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
 Note: Macros in: R-future (description)
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
 provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
 %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

R:
[x]: Package contains the mandatory BuildRequires.
[x]: The package has the standard %install section.
[x]: Package requires R-core.

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
 file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
 translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
 architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
 files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm 

[Bug 1572657] New: Review Request: nodejs-loophole - A hack to enable use of libraries that depend on a basic form of eval in Atom

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572657

Bug ID: 1572657
   Summary: Review Request: nodejs-loophole - A hack to enable use
of libraries that depend on a basic form of eval in
Atom
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: jsmith.fed...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Blocks: 956806 (nodejs-reviews), 1269538 (IoT)



Spec URL:
https://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/nodejs-loophole/nodejs-loophole.spec
SRPM URL:
https://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/nodejs-loophole/nodejs-loophole-1.1.0-1.fc29.src.rpm
Description: A hack to enable use of libraries that depend on a basic form of
eval in Atom
Fedora Account System Username: jsmith


Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956806
[Bug 956806] Node.js Review Tracker
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269538
[Bug 1269538] Tracker for IoT on Fedora
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1517451] Review Request: gnome-internet-radio-locator

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1517451



--- Comment #10 from MartinKG  ---
please correct your spec file again !

rpmlint reports:

rpmlint -i -v gnome-internet-radio-locator.x86_64: W:
incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.1.2-2 ['1.1.2-1.fc29', '1.1.2-1']

a better description for the %changelog section would:

%changelog
* Fri Apr 27 2018 Ole Aamot  - 1.1.2-1
- Update to 1.1.2

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572461] Review Request: R-munsell - Utilities for Using Munsell Colours

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572461

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
 CC||zebo...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
Package approved.


Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed


Issues:
===
- Package have the default element marked as %%doc :DESCRIPTION


= MUST items =

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "Unknown or generated". 44 files have unknown license. Detailed
 output of licensecheck in
 /home/bob/packaging/review/R-munsell/review-R-munsell/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
 license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
 license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
 provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
 %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

R:
[x]: Package contains the mandatory BuildRequires.
[x]: The package has the standard %install section.
[x]: Package requires R-core.

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
 file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
 translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
 architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
 files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: No 

[Bug 1572370] Review Request: nodejs-babel-plugin-syntax-async-generators - Allow parsing of async generator functions

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572370

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
 CC||zebo...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
 - Latest version packaged
 - License ok
 - Builds in Mock
 - Conforms to the Packaging Guidelines

 - Fix your changelog entry, it's missing Version-Release and a message:

%changelog
* Thu Apr 26 2018 Jared K. Smith 
- 

Package otherwise approved.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572359] Review Request: nodejs-babel-plugin-syntax-async-functions - Allow parsing of async functions

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572359

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
 CC||zebo...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
 - Latest version packaged
 - License ok
 - Builds in Mock
 - No rpmlint errors
 - Conforms to the Packaging Guidelines

Package approved.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572346] Review Request: nodejs-babylon - A JavaScript parser

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572346

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
 CC||zebo...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
 - Latest version packaged
 - License ok
 - Builds in Mock
 - No rpmlint errors
 - Conforms to the Packaging Guidelines

Package approved.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572339] Review Request: nodejs-test-exclude - Test for inclusion or exclusion of paths using pkg-conf and globs

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572339

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
 CC||zebo...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
DEBUG util.py:482:  BUILDSTDERR: No matching package to install:
'npm(micromatch)'
DEBUG util.py:482:  BUILDSTDERR: No matching package to install:
'npm(require-main-filename)'
DEBUG util.py:482:  BUILDSTDERR: Not all dependencies satisfied
DEBUG util.py:482:  BUILDSTDERR: Error: Some packages could not be found.

 I had them around because I keep all my previous reviews but you'll not be
able to build the package. Also it needs npm(micromatch) >= 3.1.8.


 - Latest version packaged
 - License ok
 - Builds in Mock
 - No rpmlint errors
 - Conforms to the Packaging Guidelines

Package approved.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572337] Review Request: nodejs-any-path - Make the keys on an object path.sep agnostic

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572337

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
 CC||zebo...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
 - Latest version packaged
 - License ok
 - Builds in Mock
 - No rpmlint errors
 - Conforms to the Packaging Guidelines

Package approved.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572183] Review Request: perl-Menlo-Legacy - Legacy internal and client support for Menlo

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572183



--- Comment #3 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Menlo-Legacy

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1517451] Review Request: gnome-internet-radio-locator

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1517451



--- Comment #9 from o...@gnome.org ---
Spec URL:
https://people.gnome.org/~ole/testing/SPECS/gnome-internet-radio-locator.spec
SRPM URL:
https://people.gnome.org/~ole/testing/SRPMS/gnome-internet-radio-locator-1.1.2-1.fc28.src.rpm
Description: Locate Internet Radio Stations
Fedora Account System Username: oka

I have built gnome-internet-radio-locator 1.1.2 for rawhide:

https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=26591016

I have built a RPM package for fc28 x86_64 from the SRPM:

https://people.gnome.org/~ole/testing/RPMS/x86_64/gnome-internet-radio-locator-1.1.2-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572580] Review Request: gegl04 - Graph based image processing framework

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572580

Nils Philippsen  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||nphil...@redhat.com



--- Comment #2 from Nils Philippsen  ---
(In reply to Iwicki Artur from comment #1)
> At the very start, there's
> >%global apiver 0.4
> but then later it says
> >%descriptiondevel
> >The %{name}-devel package contains libraries and header files for developing 
> >applications that use %{name} API version 0.3.

Good catch, I noticed that too meanwhile and fixed it.

> Shouldn't the %{apiver} symbol be used here?
> 
> Also, why is the release field 0.1 instead of just 1?

Because I have a slight obsession with using the -1 release only when it's
approved ;-). I'll bump it before I import it into dist-git.

I've rolled a new one with these changes:

* Fri Apr 27 2018 Nils Philippsen  - 0.4.0-0.2
- add tools subpackage
- tidy up remains of 0.3
- add back gtk-doc documentation

Spec URL: https://nphilipp.fedorapeople.org/review/gegl04/gegl04.spec
SRPM URL:
https://nphilipp.fedorapeople.org/review/gegl04/gegl04-0.4.0-0.2.fc28.src.rpm

The addition of the tools subpackage is the most prominent change, it adds back
the command line executables which were previously left out in the gegl03
package (in lieu of those contained in plain 'gegl', i.e. versions 0.2.x). The
binaries are version-suffixed which will be symlinked from their unversioned
names from Fedora 29/Rawhide on.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572580] Review Request: gegl04 - Graph based image processing framework

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572580

Iwicki Artur  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||fed...@svgames.pl



--- Comment #1 from Iwicki Artur  ---
At the very start, there's
>%global apiver 0.4
but then later it says
>%descriptiondevel
>The %{name}-devel package contains libraries and header files for developing 
>applications that use %{name} API version 0.3.
Shouldn't the %{apiver} symbol be used here?

Also, why is the release field 0.1 instead of just 1?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1563830] Review Request: python-aiodns - Simple DNS resolver for asyncio

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1563830



--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-aiodns-1.1.1-1.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 stable repository.
If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572580] New: Review Request: gegl04 - Graph based image processing framework

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572580

Bug ID: 1572580
   Summary: Review Request: gegl04 - Graph based image processing
framework
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: nphil...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: https://nphilipp.fedorapeople.org/review/gegl04/gegl04.spec
SRPM URL:
https://nphilipp.fedorapeople.org/review/gegl04/gegl04-0.4.0-0.1.fc28.src.rpm
Description: GEGL (Generic Graphics Library) is a graph based image processing
framework.
GEGLs original design was made to scratch GIMP's itches for a new
compositing and processing core. This core is being designed to have
minimal dependencies and a simple well defined API.
Fedora Account System Username: nphilipp

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1338339] Review Request: openrave - Open Robotics Automation Virtual Environment

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1338339

Antonio Trande  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
   Assignee|anto.tra...@gmail.com   |nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Flags|fedora-review?  |



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1571542] Review Request: R-bit64 - A S3 Class for Vectors of 64bit Integers

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1571542



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
R-bit64-0.9.7-2.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 testing repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-1e2861d8a3

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572070] Review Request: pass-otp - A pass extension for managing one-time-password (OTP) tokens

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572070



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
pass-otp-1.1.0-2.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 testing repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-5e09195603

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1571287] Review Request: python-lightblue - A Python library to work with Lightblue database API

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1571287



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-lightblue-0.1.3-2.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-5387dbbbe9

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1571590] Review Request: R-sourcetools - Tools for Reading, Tokenizing and Parsing R Code

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1571590



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
R-sourcetools-0.1.7-1.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 testing repository.
If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-d984cce1de

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1517451] Review Request: gnome-internet-radio-locator

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1517451



--- Comment #8 from MartinKG  ---
1. where is the correct link to the SOURCE file:
gnome-internet-radio-locator-1.1.1.tar.xz

2. the Group Tag isn't need any longer, please remove it from the spec file.
Group:  Applications/Internet

3. Can you use the %{url} macro in Source0
Source: %{url}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.xz

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572183] Review Request: perl-Menlo-Legacy - Legacy internal and client support for Menlo

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572183

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||ppi...@redhat.com



--- Comment #2 from Petr Pisar  ---
This package should explicitly conflict with perl-Menlo < 1.9019.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572070] Review Request: pass-otp - A pass extension for managing one-time-password (OTP) tokens

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572070



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
pass-otp-1.1.0-2.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 testing repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-32c6db863f

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1571542] Review Request: R-bit64 - A S3 Class for Vectors of 64bit Integers

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1571542



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
R-bit64-0.9.7-2.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 testing repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-415196871f

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1571590] Review Request: R-sourcetools - Tools for Reading, Tokenizing and Parsing R Code

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1571590



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
R-sourcetools-0.1.7-1.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 testing repository.
If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-5e274d3548

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572486] Review Request: R-rex - Friendly Regular Expressions

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572486



--- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade  ---
This package built on koji: 
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=26588232

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1572486] New: Review Request: R-rex - Friendly Regular Expressions

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1572486

Bug ID: 1572486
   Summary: Review Request: R-rex - Friendly Regular Expressions
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: quantum.anal...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org




Spec URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//R-rex.spec
SRPM URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//R-rex-1.1.2-1.fc27.src.rpm

Description:
A friendly interface for the construction of regular expressions.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org