date:20131027

On Sun, 27 Oct 2013 01:54:44 + (UTC), Ben Boeckel wrote:

 Well, there is FE-NEEDSPONSOR. Could we add a checkbox to this page[1]
 for needing a sponsor? A new packager might not know about
 FE-NEEDSPONSOR and getting it right up front would help, I'd think.

 [1]https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Fedoraformat=fedora-review
 

The detailed Join process description for new packagers mentions
FE-NEEDSPONSOR:

  
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers#Create_Your_Review_Request

Making bugzilla forms more complex cannot replace documentation.
(We've had sponsored packagers requesting FE-NEEDSPONSOR for the package,
and the fedora-review flag's '?' state is confusing enough already.)

 I also wouldn't mind seeing a list of FE-NEEDSPONSOR bugs be emailed to
 devel@ (similar to the ownership change email). Open reviews might be
 nice as well, but maybe just FE-NEEDSPONSOR would be something to start
 with.

http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/NEEDSPONSOR.html
[ http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/ ]
In the lists of new review requests, they are highlighted in green colour,
and the list is sorted by date.

Alternatively, add yourself to the Cc of the FE-NEEDSPONSOR tracker
ticket in bugzilla.
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: Ambassadors places in new Working Groups

2013-10-27 Thread Frank Murphy

On Sun, 27 Oct 2013 12:34:01 +0100
Nobrakal nobra...@gmail.com wrote:

 In my mind, Ambassadors are more near of users than developers or
 marketing team. Ambassadors organize all the events, submit new
 idea... It is really important to have at least an ambassador in WG
 
 Alexandre

It is also important to have them in freemedia, 
don't see that happening, too often.


-- 
Regards,
Frank 
www.frankly3d.com

-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

F-20 Branched report: 20131027 changes

2013-10-27 Thread Fedora Branched Report

Compose started at Sun Oct 27 09:15:02 UTC 2013

Broken deps for armhfp
--
[blueman]
blueman-1.23-7.fc20.armv7hl requires obex-data-server = 0:0.4.3
blueman-1.23-7.fc20.armv7hl requires gvfs-obexftp
[bwm-ng]
bwm-ng-0.6-11.1.fc20.armv7hl requires libstatgrab.so.9
[cloud-init]
cloud-init-0.7.2-7.fc20.noarch requires dmidecode
[cobbler]
cobbler-2.4.0-2.fc20.noarch requires syslinux
[condor-wallaby]
condor-wallaby-client-5.0.3-4.fc20.noarch requires python-qmf = 
0:0.9.1073306
[fts]
fts-server-3.1.1-1.fc20.armv7hl requires libactivemq-cpp.so.14
[glpi]
glpi-0.84.2-1.fc20.noarch requires php-ZendFramework2-Version
glpi-0.84.2-1.fc20.noarch requires php-ZendFramework2-Stdlib
glpi-0.84.2-1.fc20.noarch requires php-ZendFramework2-ServiceManager
glpi-0.84.2-1.fc20.noarch requires php-ZendFramework2-Loader
glpi-0.84.2-1.fc20.noarch requires php-ZendFramework2-I18n
glpi-0.84.2-1.fc20.noarch requires php-ZendFramework2-Cache-apc
glpi-0.84.2-1.fc20.noarch requires php-ZendFramework2-Cache
[gnome-do-plugins]
gnome-do-plugins-thunderbird-0.8.4-14.fc20.armv7hl requires thunderbird
[gofer]
ruby-gofer-0.75-4.fc20.noarch requires rubygem(qpid) = 0:0.16.0
[gradle]
gradle-1.0-18.fc20.noarch requires plexus-container-default
[grass]
grass-6.4.3-2.fc20.armv7hl requires libgeos-3.3.8.so
grass-libs-6.4.3-2.fc20.armv7hl requires libgeos-3.3.8.so
[gtkd]
gtkd-geany-tags-2.0.0-29.20120815git9ae9181.fc18.noarch requires gtkd = 
0:2.0.0-29.20120815git9ae9181.fc18
[gxine]
gxine-0.5.907-10.fc20.armv7hl requires libxine.so.1
[kawa]
1:kawa-1.11-5.fc19.armv7hl requires servlet25
[koji]
koji-vm-1.8.0-2.fc20.noarch requires python-virtinst
[kyua-cli]
kyua-cli-0.5-3.fc19.armv7hl requires liblutok.so.0
kyua-cli-tests-0.5-3.fc19.armv7hl requires liblutok.so.0
[monotone]
monotone-1.0-11.fc19.armv7hl requires libbotan-1.8.2.so
perl-Monotone-1.0-11.fc19.armv7hl requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.16.2)
[mozilla-firetray]
mozilla-firetray-thunderbird-0.3.6-0.5.143svn.fc18.1.armv7hl requires 
thunderbird = 0:11
[msp430-libc]
msp430-libc-20120224-2.fc19.noarch requires msp430-gcc = 0:4.6.3
[nifti2dicom]
nifti2dicom-0.4.6-3.fc20.armv7hl requires libvtksys.so.5.10
nifti2dicom-0.4.6-3.fc20.armv7hl requires libvtkWidgets.so.5.10
nifti2dicom-0.4.6-3.fc20.armv7hl requires libvtkVolumeRendering.so.5.10
nifti2dicom-0.4.6-3.fc20.armv7hl requires libvtkViews.so.5.10
nifti2dicom-0.4.6-3.fc20.armv7hl requires libvtkTextAnalysis.so.5.10
nifti2dicom-0.4.6-3.fc20.armv7hl requires libvtkRendering.so.5.10
nifti2dicom-0.4.6-3.fc20.armv7hl requires libvtkParallel.so.5.10
nifti2dicom-0.4.6-3.fc20.armv7hl requires libvtkInfovis.so.5.10
nifti2dicom-0.4.6-3.fc20.armv7hl requires libvtkImaging.so.5.10
nifti2dicom-0.4.6-3.fc20.armv7hl requires libvtkIO.so.5.10
nifti2dicom-0.4.6-3.fc20.armv7hl requires libvtkHybrid.so.5.10
nifti2dicom-0.4.6-3.fc20.armv7hl requires libvtkGraphics.so.5.10
nifti2dicom-0.4.6-3.fc20.armv7hl requires libvtkGeovis.so.5.10
nifti2dicom-0.4.6-3.fc20.armv7hl requires libvtkGenericFiltering.so.5.10
nifti2dicom-0.4.6-3.fc20.armv7hl requires libvtkFiltering.so.5.10
nifti2dicom-0.4.6-3.fc20.armv7hl requires libvtkCommon.so.5.10
nifti2dicom-0.4.6-3.fc20.armv7hl requires libvtkCharts.so.5.10
nifti2dicom-0.4.6-3.fc20.armv7hl requires libQVTK.so.5.10
[nocpulse-common]
nocpulse-common-2.2.7-2.fc20.noarch requires perl(RHN::DBI)
[openbox]
gdm-control-3.5.2-2.fc20.armv7hl requires gnome-panel
gnome-panel-control-3.5.2-2.fc20.armv7hl requires gnome-panel
[openpts]
openpts-0.2.6-7.fc20.armv7hl requires tboot
[osm2pgsql]
osm2pgsql-0.82.0-1.fc20.armv7hl requires libgeos-3.3.8.so
[oyranos]
oyranos-libs-0.4.0-7.fc19.armv7hl requires libraw.so.5
[perl-BerkeleyDB]
perl-BerkeleyDB-0.53-1.fc20.armv7hl requires libdb = 0:5.3.21
[perl-Language-Expr]
perl-Language-Expr-0.19-4.fc19.noarch requires 
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.16.2)
[perl-MIME-Lite-HTML]
perl-MIME-Lite-HTML-1.24-4.fc18.noarch requires 
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.16.0)
[perl-Padre]
perl-Padre-0.90-6.fc18.noarch requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.16.0)
[pure]
pure-doc-0.57-4.fc20.noarch requires pure = 0:0.57-4.fc20
[python-tag]
python-tag-2013.1-1.fc20.armv7hl requires libboost_python.so.1.53.0
[rootplot]
rootplot-2.2.1-7.fc19.noarch requires root-python
[ruby-spqr]
ruby-spqr-0.3.6-7.fc20.noarch requires ruby-qpid-qmf
[rubygem-audited-activerecord]
rubygem-audited-activerecord-3.0.0-3.fc19.noarch requires 
rubygem(activerecord)  0:4
[rubygem-fog]
rubygem-fog-1.11.1-1.fc20.noarch

Re: Lack of response about sponsorship

2013-10-27 Thread Alec Leamas

On 10/27/2013 12:46 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:

On Sun, 27 Oct 2013 01:54:44 + (UTC), Ben Boeckel wrote:

I also wouldn't mind seeing a list of FE-NEEDSPONSOR bugs be emailed to
devel@ (similar to the ownership change email). Open reviews might be
nice as well, but maybe just FE-NEEDSPONSOR would be something to start
with.

http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/NEEDSPONSOR.html
[ http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/ ]
In the lists of new review requests, they are highlighted in green colour,
and the list is sorted by date.

Alternatively, add yourself to the Cc of the FE-NEEDSPONSOR tracker
ticket in bugzilla.
Or, email not all FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets but only those which are
deemed too old to be OK. An email message like that (not too often!)
would actually have a high signal/noise ratio, making all of us aware
what's happening when a newcomer is sitting in limbo. Which she should not.

Still remember the feeling sitting with a package waiting for a sponsor,
trying to follow the process but with absolutely no sponsor feedback. It
was *not* encouraging.

--alec

Well, there is FE-NEEDSPONSOR. Could we add a checkbox to this page[1]
for needing a sponsor? A new packager might not know about
FE-NEEDSPONSOR and getting it right up front would help, I'd think.
[1]https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Fedoraformat=fedora-review

The detailed Join process description for new packagers mentions
FE-NEEDSPONSOR:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers#Create_Your_Review_Request

Making bugzilla forms more complex cannot replace documentation.
(We've had sponsored packagers requesting FE-NEEDSPONSOR for the package,
and the fedora-review flag's '?' state is confusing enough already.)

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: Ambassadors places in new Working Groups

2013-10-27 Thread Nobrakal

2013/10/27, Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com:
 On Sun, 2013-10-27 at 12:27 +0100, Nobrakal wrote:
 In my mind, Ambassadors are more near of users than developers or
 marketing team. Ambassadors organize all the events, submit new
 idea... It is really important to have at least an ambassador in WG

 I don't think Amabssdors must be part of the WGs, unless they also have
 a skill set relevant to the WG. For example, Tuan isn't just an
 ambassador. He works with servers and therefore brings certain knowledge
 that will be useful to the WG.

That great, for Tuan and Cwickert. But my problem is that neither
email was sent on the ambassadors list. And, as you say, they are
ambassadors additional. We need real representant of Ambassadors (I
don't say Tuan ans Cwickert are bad ambassadors)

 Elected members of the WG are ones who will *lead* them. Ambassadors are
 more than welcome to keep tabs on these working groups and provide them
 with feedback when required, like the rest of the community.

Yes, but we need a mentor for this ambassador, to coordinate their
action in the WG.

 Ambassadors
 generally jump into action in the last stage of a release: when it's
 ready, and we need to spread information about it. We don't do much
 during rest of the release cycle, with tasks that *create* a release.

 As I understand it, this is the order of information flow:

 Development/WGs (Develop) - Marketing/Docs team (Keep tabs + create
 collateral: flyers etc.) - Ambassadors + and the community, in general
 (Spread the word) - rest of the world.

It's for the first release. After, for your product, you need
feedback, and other suggestion, to best help them. The user is the
center of all contributors. So, your order become

Development/WGs (Develop) - Marketing/Docs team (Keep tabs + create
collateral: flyers etc.) - Ambassadors + and the community, in general
 (Spread the word) - rest of the world. - User - Development/WGs
(Develop)

This last step require ambassadors.


 It's similar to what we have now, which is why I keep requesting folks
 that aren't developers to help out with marketing/docs, or at least to
 keep tabs on their tasks.

That very good. This is why you need ambassadors, for all steps in the
developpement.

 Users don't create software. They use it.
That the most important thing ! Softwares are make to users. If you
exclude user of your process, it's a big mistake

Most users don't know or care
 at all about how software is created. In most cases, users are only
 involved during the first phase of software development, when
 requirements are being collected. The WGs already have their
 requirements figured out.

You forget the post-production. After a software, user have some other
idea of improvement.

 For example, what would you as a user contribute to the server (or
 another) working group?

For example, I'm a user. I want php on my server, but it isn't in the
server group on yum. I can tell developpers to add php in their
group.


2013/10/27, Frank Murphy frankl...@gmail.com:
 On Sun, 27 Oct 2013 12:34:01 +0100
 Nobrakal nobra...@gmail.com wrote:

Then why do Ambassadors not reply to emails even from other
Ambassadors, the perception I have been given is that Ambassadors
should not be disturbed. Ankur (FranciscoD), could fill you in more
on this *do not contact aspect of *some* Ambassadors.

If some ambassadors do not their jobs, it's another problem. I speak
about the 'normal' ambassadors.

 It is also important to have them in freemedia,
 don't see that happening, too often.

Yes, you're right, but it's another problem. But, now, freemedia isn't
longer required. Live usb is very useful, on my mind.

Alexandre
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: Ambassadors places in new Working Groups

2013-10-27 Thread Mathieu Bridon

On Sun, 2013-10-27 at 14:46 +0100, Nobrakal wrote:
 2013/10/27, Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com:
  On Sun, 2013-10-27 at 12:27 +0100, Nobrakal wrote:
  In my mind, Ambassadors are more near of users than developers or
  marketing team. Ambassadors organize all the events, submit new
  idea... It is really important to have at least an ambassador in WG
 
  I don't think Amabssdors must be part of the WGs, unless they also have
  a skill set relevant to the WG. For example, Tuan isn't just an
  ambassador. He works with servers and therefore brings certain knowledge
  that will be useful to the WG.
 
 That great, for Tuan and Cwickert. But my problem is that neither
 email was sent on the ambassadors list.

Honestly, if you don't follow up the other lists, then I can't
understand how you can do a good job of representing Fedora.

And really, the working groups are about **making** Fedora. Ambassadors
are about **promoting** it. If you want to be part of those who make
Fedora, then you're not just an ambassador any more, you become one of
the developers. (and then you really should follow the lists where this
was announced)


-- 
Mathieu

-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: PATH has /bin before /usr/bin in upgraded rawhide

On Sun, 27 Oct 2013 02:00:17 +0200, Sandro Mani wrote:

 
  your first post is unclear because you speak about two setups
  to get rid of all this UsrMove fragments make a strict config
 
 
 
 Ah yes, I could have expressed it better. My problem is the following:
 
 [sandro@oldrawhide]$ echo $PATH
 /bin:/usr/bin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/sbin:/home/sandro/.local/bin:/home/sandro/bin
 
 [sandro@newrawhide]$ echo $PATH
 /usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/bin:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/sbin:/home/sandro/.local/bin:/home/sandro/bin
  
 
 
 So, to write it clearly: I didn't change or play with any PATH settings 
 anywhere, on neither of the two machines. My problem is that I cannot 
 find who is causing the paths on my oldrawhide machines to be 
 different from those of my newrawhide.

In which places have you searched already?
Is it the same for a fresh user account?
Is it the same for root?
Is the setup package unmodified?
Is it specific to bash or also other shells (such as tcsh)?

/home/sandro/.local/bin in the PATH is not the default.
Or is it new for Rawhide?
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

rawhide report: 20131027 changes

2013-10-27 Thread Fedora Rawhide Report

Compose started at Sun Oct 27 08:15:02 UTC 2013

Broken deps for i386
--
[OpenEXR_CTL]
OpenEXR_CTL-1.0.1-16.fc20.i686 requires libImath.so.6
OpenEXR_CTL-1.0.1-16.fc20.i686 requires libIlmThread.so.6
OpenEXR_CTL-1.0.1-16.fc20.i686 requires libIlmImf.so.7
OpenEXR_CTL-1.0.1-16.fc20.i686 requires libIexMath.so.6
OpenEXR_CTL-1.0.1-16.fc20.i686 requires libIex.so.6
OpenEXR_CTL-1.0.1-16.fc20.i686 requires libHalf.so.6
OpenEXR_CTL-libs-1.0.1-16.fc20.i686 requires libIlmThread.so.6
OpenEXR_CTL-libs-1.0.1-16.fc20.i686 requires libIlmImf.so.7
OpenEXR_CTL-libs-1.0.1-16.fc20.i686 requires libIex.so.6
[R-RScaLAPACK]
R-RScaLAPACK-0.6.1-13.fc20.i686 requires libatlas.so.3
[apbs]
apbs-1.3-6.fc20.i686 requires libf77blas.so.3
apbs-1.3-6.fc20.i686 requires libatlas.so.3
[blueman]
blueman-1.23-7.fc20.i686 requires obex-data-server = 0:0.4.3
blueman-1.23-7.fc20.i686 requires gvfs-obexftp
[cinepaint]
cinepaint-libs-1.3-9.fc19.i686 requires libImath.so.6
cinepaint-libs-1.3-9.fc19.i686 requires libIlmThread.so.6
cinepaint-libs-1.3-9.fc19.i686 requires libIlmImf.so.7
cinepaint-libs-1.3-9.fc19.i686 requires libIexMath.so.6
cinepaint-libs-1.3-9.fc19.i686 requires libIex.so.6
cinepaint-libs-1.3-9.fc19.i686 requires libHalf.so.6
[converseen]
converseen-0.6.2-2.fc20.i686 requires libMagick++-6.Q16.so.1
[cp2k]
cp2k-2.4-6.fc20.i686 requires libf77blas.so.3
cp2k-2.4-6.fc20.i686 requires libatlas.so.3
cp2k-mpich-2.4-6.fc20.i686 requires libf77blas.so.3
cp2k-openmpi-2.4-6.fc20.i686 requires libf77blas.so.3
[dayplanner]
dayplanner-0.11-1.fc21.noarch requires 
perl(Date::HolidayParser::iCalendar) = 0:0.4
[derelict]
derelict-tcod-3-20.20130626gite70c293.fc20.i686 requires tcod
derelict-tcod-devel-3-20.20130626gite70c293.fc20.i686 requires tcod
[drawtiming]
drawtiming-0.7.1-11.fc20.i686 requires libMagick++-6.Q16.so.1
[ekiga]
ekiga-4.0.1-6.fc20.i686 requires libcamel-1.2.so.45
[evolution-mapi]
evolution-mapi-3.10.1-1.fc21.i686 requires libcamel-1.2.so.45
[evolution-rss]
1:evolution-rss-0.3.94-1.fc21.i686 requires libcamel-1.2.so.45
[fatrat]
1:fatrat-1.2.0-0.14.beta2.fc20.i686 requires liblog4cpp.so.4
[freefem++]
freefem++-3.19-3.1.fc18.i686 requires libf77blas.so.3
freefem++-3.19-3.1.fc18.i686 requires libcblas.so.3
freefem++-3.19-3.1.fc18.i686 requires libatlas.so.3
freefem++-glx-3.19-3.1.fc18.i686 requires libf77blas.so.3
freefem++-glx-3.19-3.1.fc18.i686 requires libcblas.so.3
freefem++-glx-3.19-3.1.fc18.i686 requires libatlas.so.3
freefem++-mpi-3.19-3.1.fc18.i686 requires libf77blas.so.3
freefem++-mpi-3.19-3.1.fc18.i686 requires libcblas.so.3
freefem++-mpi-3.19-3.1.fc18.i686 requires libatlas.so.3
[gfal]
gfal-1.16.0-1.fc21.i686 requires libgsoap.so.3
gfal-doc-1.16.0-1.fc21.i686 requires libgsoap.so.3
gfal-python-1.16.0-1.fc21.i686 requires libgsoap.so.3
[gnome-contacts]
gnome-contacts-3.10-1.fc21.i686 requires libcamel-1.2.so.45
[gradle]
gradle-1.0-18.fc20.noarch requires plexus-container-default
[gtkd]
gtkd-2.0.0-29.20120815git9ae9181.fc18.i686 requires libphobos-ldc.so.60
[gxine]
gxine-0.5.907-10.fc20.i686 requires libxine.so.1
[httpdtap]
httpdtap-0.2-2.fc21.noarch requires kernel-debuginfo
httpdtap-0.2-2.fc21.noarch requires httpd-debuginfo
httpdtap-0.2-2.fc21.noarch requires apr-util-debuginfo
httpdtap-0.2-2.fc21.noarch requires apr-debuginfo
[kawa]
1:kawa-1.11-5.fc19.i686 requires servlet25
[koji]
koji-vm-1.8.0-2.fc20.noarch requires python-virtinst
[kxstitch]
kxstitch-0.8.4.1-16.fc20.i686 requires libMagick++-6.Q16.so.1
[kyua-cli]
kyua-cli-0.5-3.fc19.i686 requires liblutok.so.0
kyua-cli-tests-0.5-3.fc19.i686 requires liblutok.so.0
[libghemical]
libghemical-2.99.1-24.fc20.i686 requires libf77blas.so.3
libghemical-2.99.1-24.fc20.i686 requires libatlas.so.3
[libopensync-plugin-evolution2]
1:libopensync-plugin-evolution2-0.22-37.fc20.i686 requires 
libcamel-1.2.so.45
[libopensync-plugin-irmc]
1:libopensync-plugin-irmc-0.22-7.fc20.i686 requires libopenobex.so.1
[mpqc]
mpqc-2.3.1-23.fc20.i686 requires libf77blas.so.3
mpqc-2.3.1-23.fc20.i686 requires libatlas.so.3
[netdisco]
netdisco-1.1-6.fc20.noarch requires perl(SNMP::Info::Layer2::Bay)
[nifti2dicom]
nifti2dicom-0.4.6-3.fc20.i686 requires libvtksys.so.5.10
nifti2dicom-0.4.6-3.fc20.i686 requires libvtkWidgets.so.5.10
nifti2dicom-0.4.6-3.fc20.i686 requires libvtkVolumeRendering.so.5.10
nifti2dicom-0.4.6-3.fc20.i686 requires libvtkViews.so.5.10
nifti2dicom-0.4.6-3.fc20.i686 requires

Re: PATH has /bin before /usr/bin in upgraded rawhide

2013-10-27 Thread Frank Murphy

On Sun, 27 Oct 2013 14:59:33 +0100
Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com wrote:


 /home/sandro/.local/bin in the PATH is not the default.
 Or is it new for Rawhide?

This in in F20 for me as user:
~$ echo $PATH
snip.../home/frank/.local/bin:/home/frank/bin

so the bit with the name seems to be branched at least


-- 
Regards,
Frank 
www.frankly3d.com

-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: PATH has /bin before /usr/bin in upgraded rawhide

2013-10-27 Thread Sandro Mani


In which places have you searched already?

$HOME/.bashrc
$HOME/.bash_profile
/etc/bashrc
/etc/profile
/etc/profile.d/*

Is it the same for a fresh user account?
Is it the same for root?

Logging in from a VT as root resp. newly created user test I get

[root@oldrawhide]# echo $PATH
/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/sbin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/root/bin
# - chaos

[test@oldrawhide]$ echo $PATH
/usr/local/bin:/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/sbin:/home/test/.local/bin:/home/test/bin
# - /bin:/usr/bin inverted, otherwise ok


Is the setup package unmodified?

yes (reinstalled just to be sure)

Is it specific to bash or also other shells (such as tcsh)?
Also tcsh is affected (changed login shell in /etc/passwd and logged in 
from VT)

/home/sandro/.local/bin in the PATH is not the default.
Or is it new for Rawhide?


P.s.: I know some people like easter eggs, but please, don't 
exaggerate... http://smani.fedorapeople.org/screenshot.jpg (no, I did 
not rotate the image)


--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: Lack of response about sponsorship

On Sun, 27 Oct 2013 13:43:57 +0100, Alec Leamas wrote:

 Or, email not all  FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets but only those which are 
 deemed too old to be OK. 

When would that be?

A recurring problem in the review queue is long response time. That is,
it takes several weeks (or even longer) till the submitter returns with
a reply and/or an updated package.

Another problem is if the submitter only offers a single new package.
Often a small one, perhaps even with mistakes. Extra bad if it doesn't
build. And while other submitters are brave enough to attempt at
contributing a few reviews, some refuse to do that, and after a few months
will still not have reviewed even their own package and have not read
the Join Wiki page step-by-step instructions. Sorry, but there are
guidelines about How To Get Sponsored. A little bit of activity is needed.
Maintenance of the package in the collection also requires some effort.

The sponsors aren't machines, who process the review queue in FIFO order
and only click some buttons. FIFO isn't feasible, because some submitters
are more responsive and are faster at absorbing the packaging guidelines
and at providing packages that pass review.

 An email message like that (not too often!) 
 would actually have a high signal/noise ratio, making all of us aware 
 what's happening when a newcomer is sitting in limbo.  Which she should not.

It's always possible for the newcomer to ask for help on devel@ list.
Communicate!

 Still remember the feeling sitting with a package waiting for a sponsor, 
 trying to follow the process but with absolutely no sponsor feedback. It 
 was *not* encouraging.

Hmmm ... it has taken no more than five days for you to get sponsored:

  https://bugzilla.redhat.com/794985

In a slightly older ticket, a potential sponsor has returned to you
quickly, and there has been a lot of activity in that ticket beyond that.

If I search the Review Queue for your email address, I also find a
much older attempt at submitting a package in 2008, and even then there
has been quick feedback from a reviewer (after only five days). But
after a series of comments, it gets harder to understand what has 
happened, and later you've not responded to the ping from a potential
sponsor ( https://bugzilla.redhat.com/471575 ).

So, I think you're not fair.
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: Lack of response about sponsorship

2013-10-27 Thread Alec Leamas


On 10/27/2013 07:43 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:

On Sun, 27 Oct 2013 13:43:57 +0100, Alec Leamas wrote:


Or, email not all  FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets but only those which are
deemed too old to be OK.

When would that be?

A recurring problem in the review queue is long response time. That is,
it takes several weeks (or even longer) till the submitter returns with
a reply and/or an updated package.

Another problem is if the submitter only offers a single new package.
Often a small one, perhaps even with mistakes. Extra bad if it doesn't
build. And while other submitters are brave enough to attempt at
contributing a few reviews, some refuse to do that, and after a few months
will still not have reviewed even their own package and have not read
the Join Wiki page step-by-step instructions. Sorry, but there are
guidelines about How To Get Sponsored. A little bit of activity is needed.
Maintenance of the package in the collection also requires some effort.

The sponsors aren't machines, who process the review queue in FIFO order
and only click some buttons. FIFO isn't feasible, because some submitters
are more responsive and are faster at absorbing the packaging guidelines
and at providing packages that pass review.
Certainly not. my idea was just that some kind of reminder if no-one 
takes the ball , however that is defined (comment from sponsor, assigned 
to sponsor, ...) within some time.

An email message like that (not too often!)
would actually have a high signal/noise ratio, making all of us aware
what's happening when a newcomer is sitting in limbo.  Which she should not.

It's always possible for the newcomer to ask for help on devel@ list.
Communicate!
True. But I know newcomers for which sending a mail to this list is a 
major step you don't really are ready for at that point. Believe it or 
not, I was one of them.



Still remember the feeling sitting with a package waiting for a sponsor,
trying to follow the process but with absolutely no sponsor feedback. It
was *not* encouraging.

Hmmm ... it has taken no more than five days for you to get sponsored:

   https://bugzilla.redhat.com/794985

In a slightly older ticket, a potential sponsor has returned to you
quickly, and there has been a lot of activity in that ticket beyond that.

If I search the Review Queue for your email address, I also find a
much older attempt at submitting a package in 2008, and even then there
has been quick feedback from a reviewer (after only five days). But
after a series of comments, it gets harder to understand what has
happened, and later you've not responded to the ping from a potential
sponsor ( https://bugzilla.redhat.com/471575 ).

So, I think you're not fair.
That package was actually a last attempt, which worked (thanks Petr!). 
That said, I havn't blamed anyone, just described my own feeling. How 
could that be unfair?


--alec
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: Lack of response about sponsorship

On Sun, 27 Oct 2013 20:23:22 +0100, Alec Leamas wrote:

 [...] my idea was just that some kind of reminder if no-one 
 takes the ball , however that is defined (comment from sponsor, assigned 
 to sponsor, ...) within some time.

That wouldn't be helpful. There would only be a notification about
package submitters, who are inactive and wait for something to happen.
The sponsorship process requires _two_ parties to be active.

Working on the package during review often is much easier than working
on it during its later lifetime in the package collection.

  It's always possible for the newcomer to ask for help on devel@ list.
  Communicate!
 True. But I know newcomers for which sending a mail to this list is a 
 major step you don't really are ready for at that point. Believe it or 
 not, I was one of them.

That makes it harder to convince a sponsor:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group

All I can report here is that, regularly, new packagers follow those
instructions and are not too shy either to contact sponsors privately.

Basic things like posting to mailing-lists (at Fedora or upstream) and
opening tickets (at Fedora or upstream) may be prerequisites for getting
sponsored. It can happen that a newcomer needs to contact upstream already
during review. Sometimes submitters prefer dropping off.

There are also Fedora Mentors that could be consulted:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mentors#Packaging

  If I search the Review Queue for your email address, I also find a
  much older attempt at submitting a package in 2008, and even then there
  has been quick feedback from a reviewer (after only five days). But
  after a series of comments, it gets harder to understand what has
  happened, and later you've not responded to the ping from a potential
  sponsor ( https://bugzilla.redhat.com/471575 ).
 
  So, I think you're not fair.

 That package was actually a last attempt, which worked (thanks Petr!). 
 That said, I havn't blamed anyone, just described my own feeling. How 
 could that be unfair?

I think the sponsorship process has worked well for you in 2012 with very
quick sponsorship. It may have been different several years ago, but are
we talking about the process as it works nowadays or in 2008?

I also think it's too negative to refer to a last attempt without
examining the details of your first attempt in 2008 and an explanation of
what has happened there. I don't remember the size of the review queue in
2008. I don't know how many sponsors have been active in 2008. I don't
remember whether the Review Tracker Website has been active already. I don't
know whether you've tried to contact sponsors or whether you've asked the
reviewer whether he might recommend a sponsor? You've submitted a completely
different package in 2012.

Here's an interpretation of what may have happened in 2008: In ticket 471575
you've received feedback from a reviewer after five days. So far so good.
Several comments on the same day have been exchanged. There has not been
any updated pair of spec/src.rpm however. Just a spec, and that might have
interrupted the reviewers workflow. Many reviewers -- okay, some, but I
guess many others do it similarly -- return to review tickets based on
what happens in their related email folder. For example, they react to
incoming bugzilla mails where they see that the reviewer has posted an
updated package. They can mark such mails and delete other mails. That
way they don't need to revisit a growing number of tickets only to find
there has not been any activity. In this ticket, nothing has happened
anymore. It would have been an idea to ask the reviewer. Either with a
specific request in bugzilla or via email. That doesn't seem to have
happened. There has not been an update on contributed reviews. Silence.
In the same way, half a year later, a sponsor has joined and has even used
the NEEDINFO flag in the two tickets and ping'ed several times, but that
has not been responded to anymore. That has been a disappointing
experience also for the sponsor, especially if there are more submitters
who don't respond.  
Oh, and I found a ticket from 2011 that has not been assigned to Rawhide
(all reviews are assigned to Rawhide), has been without the needsponsor
link initially and has been closed as a duplicate in less than two months.
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: [Ambassadors] Ambassadors places in new Working Groups

2013-10-27 Thread inode0

On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 4:32 AM, Nobrakal nobra...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi all,

 Sorry for the double-post, but I think it's necessary.

 Recently, some Working Groups has been created [1]. In the most of
 case (except in the Server WG with Truong Anh. Tuan), we don't have
 any representant of the ambassador group.

As others have pointed out we do have ambassadors in at least almost
every group and it is really important to understand these
announcements are only regarding the initial voting membership of the
groups. Everyone is encouraged and welcome to participate and they
will be listened to during any discussions. Not being a voting member
of the group does not mean your input to the process is any less
valuable to it succeeding.

It really isn't any different than only FAmSCo members getting to vote
during FAmSCo meetings. You can still attend FAmSCo meetings and give
your input on any issues. It is up to you to participate though.

John
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: Differences between Fakeroot and Mock Suggested method

2013-10-27 Thread Jan Kratochvil

On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 01:07:15 +0200, Adam Williamson wrote:
 generate the SRPM and do 'koji build --scratch fXX blah.src.rpm' , where

You would have to rpmbuild -bs *.spec first to get blash.src.rpm.
It is done all by: fedpkg build --scratch --srpm

The problem is that it uploads the whole multi-MB .src.rpm which is too slow
on common ADSL lines (mine has 256kbit/s upload, some have 512kbit/s upload).

This is why I have to 'git diff' the changes to a server on backbone and run
fedpkg from there.  Which is no longer so much convenient / easy.
fedpkg could do some such diff against the repository state on its own
but that would sure needed also appropriate support on the Koji server side.


Jan
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

[Bug 1023707] New: perl-Dancer-1.3119 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1023707

Bug ID: 1023707
   Summary: perl-Dancer-1.3119 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: perl-Dancer
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: jples...@redhat.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: jples...@redhat.com,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org



Latest upstream release: 1.3119
Current version/release in Fedora Rawhide: 1.3118-1.fc21
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Dancer/

Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a
stable branch: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy

More information about the service that created this bug can be found at:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=yNxDoBiqlza=cc_unsubscribe
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

[Bug 1023709] New: perl-Perl-Critic-More-1.002 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1023709

Bug ID: 1023709
   Summary: perl-Perl-Critic-More-1.002 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: perl-Perl-Critic-More
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: ppi...@redhat.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: mmasl...@redhat.com,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, ppi...@redhat.com



Latest upstream release: 1.002
Current version/release in Fedora Rawhide: 1.000-11.fc20
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Perl-Critic-More/

Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a
stable branch: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy

More information about the service that created this bug can be found at:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=GkEYTHgcd2a=cc_unsubscribe
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

[Bug 1023708] New: perl-Perl-Critic-Deprecated-1.118 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1023708

Bug ID: 1023708
   Summary: perl-Perl-Critic-Deprecated-1.118 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: perl-Perl-Critic-Deprecated
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: ppi...@redhat.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: mmasl...@redhat.com,
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, ppi...@redhat.com



Latest upstream release: 1.118
Current version/release in Fedora Rawhide: 1.108-9.fc20
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Perl-Critic-Deprecated/

Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a
stable branch: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy

More information about the service that created this bug can be found at:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=SbsD3HlWtEa=cc_unsubscribe
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

[Bug 1021855] perl-Shipwright-2.4.36 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1021855

Upstream Release Monitoring upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org 
changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|perl-Shipwright-2.4.35 is   |perl-Shipwright-2.4.36 is
   |available   |available



--- Comment #2 from Upstream Release Monitoring 
upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org ---
Latest upstream release: 2.4.36
Current version/release in Fedora Rawhide: 2.4.33-4.fc20
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Shipwright/

Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a
stable branch: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy

More information about the service that created this bug can be found at:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Mi5SJqthV3a=cc_unsubscribe
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

[Bug 1023710] New: perl-Software-License-0.103007 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1023710

Bug ID: 1023710
   Summary: perl-Software-License-0.103007 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: perl-Software-License
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: berra...@redhat.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: berra...@redhat.com, iarn...@gmail.com,
p...@city-fan.org, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org,
trem...@tremble.org.uk



Latest upstream release: 0.103007
Current version/release in Fedora Rawhide: 0.103006-2.fc21
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Software-License/

Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a
stable branch: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy

More information about the service that created this bug can be found at:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=E9rMdmcoc0a=cc_unsubscribe
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

[Bug 1023711] New: perl-Text-Table-1.128 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1023711

Bug ID: 1023711
   Summary: perl-Text-Table-1.128 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: perl-Text-Table
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: psab...@redhat.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org, ppi...@redhat.com,
psab...@redhat.com



Latest upstream release: 1.128
Current version/release in Fedora Rawhide: 1.127-3.fc20
URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Text-Table/

Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a
stable branch: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy

More information about the service that created this bug can be found at:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=wTxfCbcSrYa=cc_unsubscribe
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

File App-Cmd-0.321.tar.gz uploaded to lookaside cache by eseyman

A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-App-Cmd:

ddac97582ddd845b7ba61efa402f7929  App-Cmd-0.321.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

[perl-App-Cmd] Update to 0.321

commit b459508d12fbc0e644610f17081ea1c39f8f59cd
Author: Emmanuel Seyman emman...@seyman.fr
Date:   Sun Oct 27 11:01:36 2013 +0100

Update to 0.321

 .gitignore|1 +
 perl-App-Cmd.spec |7 +--
 sources   |2 +-
 3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore
index bc0a51f..f45969e 100644
--- a/.gitignore
+++ b/.gitignore
@@ -9,3 +9,4 @@ App-Cmd-0.307.tar.gz
 /App-Cmd-0.318.tar.gz
 /App-Cmd-0.319.tar.gz
 /App-Cmd-0.320.tar.gz
+/App-Cmd-0.321.tar.gz
diff --git a/perl-App-Cmd.spec b/perl-App-Cmd.spec
index 7bb9b92..dd661d9 100644
--- a/perl-App-Cmd.spec
+++ b/perl-App-Cmd.spec
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 Name:   perl-App-Cmd
 Summary:Write command line apps with less suffering
-Version:0.320
-Release:3%{?dist}
+Version:0.321
+Release:1%{?dist}
 License:GPL+ or Artistic
 
 Source0:
http://search.cpan.org/CPAN/authors/id/R/RJ/RJBS/App-Cmd-%{version}.tar.gz 
@@ -69,6 +69,9 @@ make test
 %{_mandir}/man3/*.3*
 
 %changelog
+* Sun Oct 27 2013 Emmanuel Seyman emman...@seyman.fr - 0.321-1
+- Update to 0.321
+
 * Sat Aug 03 2013 Fedora Release Engineering rel-...@lists.fedoraproject.org 
- 0.320-3
 - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_20_Mass_Rebuild
 
diff --git a/sources b/sources
index c4259af..ef07f1d 100644
--- a/sources
+++ b/sources
@@ -1 +1 @@
-fc2992a7f1a99fde242d1e8bcfa0dce2  App-Cmd-0.320.tar.gz
+ddac97582ddd845b7ba61efa402f7929  App-Cmd-0.321.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

File Mojolicious-4.50.tar.gz uploaded to lookaside cache by eseyman

A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Mojolicious:

a6c329a786001656a5c3cf651c603f86  Mojolicious-4.50.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

[perl-Mojolicious] Update to 4.50

commit 5201d5b187bf8ae5c4aa35d97e23709aeea3e942
Author: Emmanuel Seyman emman...@seyman.fr
Date:   Sun Oct 27 11:09:21 2013 +0100

Update to 4.50

 .gitignore|1 +
 perl-Mojolicious.spec |5 -
 sources   |2 +-
 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore
index cc03bcd..3d6aca7 100644
--- a/.gitignore
+++ b/.gitignore
@@ -104,3 +104,4 @@ Mojolicious-0.26.tar.gz
 /Mojolicious-4.44.tar.gz
 /Mojolicious-4.46.tar.gz
 /Mojolicious-4.49.tar.gz
+/Mojolicious-4.50.tar.gz
diff --git a/perl-Mojolicious.spec b/perl-Mojolicious.spec
index 2ff8add..b3648bc 100644
--- a/perl-Mojolicious.spec
+++ b/perl-Mojolicious.spec
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
 Name:   perl-Mojolicious
-Version:4.49
+Version:4.50
 Release:1%{?dist}
 Summary:A next generation web framework for Perl
 License:Artistic 2.0
@@ -60,6 +60,9 @@ make test
 %{_mandir}/man3/*
 
 %changelog
+* Sun Oct 27 2013 Emmanuel Seyman emman...@seyman.fr - 4.50-1
+- Update to 4.50
+
 * Sun Oct 20 2013 Emmanuel Seyman emman...@seyman.fr - 4.49-1
 - Update to 4.49
 
diff --git a/sources b/sources
index 7815019..95f10b7 100644
--- a/sources
+++ b/sources
@@ -1 +1 @@
-f336b94efd22ffc58db36f8eb32e5430  Mojolicious-4.49.tar.gz
+a6c329a786001656a5c3cf651c603f86  Mojolicious-4.50.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

Broken dependencies: perl-BerkeleyDB



perl-BerkeleyDB has broken dependencies in the F-20 tree:
On x86_64:
perl-BerkeleyDB-0.53-1.fc20.x86_64 requires libdb = 0:5.3.21
On i386:
perl-BerkeleyDB-0.53-1.fc20.i686 requires libdb = 0:5.3.21
On armhfp:
perl-BerkeleyDB-0.53-1.fc20.armv7hl requires libdb = 0:5.3.21
Please resolve this as soon as possible.


--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

Broken dependencies: slic3r



slic3r has broken dependencies in the F-20 tree:
On x86_64:
slic3r-0.9.10b-2.fc20.noarch requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.16.3)
On i386:
slic3r-0.9.10b-2.fc20.noarch requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.16.3)
On armhfp:
slic3r-0.9.10b-2.fc20.noarch requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.16.3)
Please resolve this as soon as possible.


--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

Broken dependencies: perl-MIME-Lite-HTML



perl-MIME-Lite-HTML has broken dependencies in the F-20 tree:
On x86_64:
perl-MIME-Lite-HTML-1.24-4.fc18.noarch requires 
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.16.0)
On i386:
perl-MIME-Lite-HTML-1.24-4.fc18.noarch requires 
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.16.0)
On armhfp:
perl-MIME-Lite-HTML-1.24-4.fc18.noarch requires 
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.16.0)
Please resolve this as soon as possible.


--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

Broken dependencies: perl-PDL



perl-PDL has broken dependencies in the F-20 tree:
On x86_64:
perl-PDL-2.4.10-6.fc19.x86_64 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.16.2)
perl-PDL-2.4.10-6.fc19.x86_64 requires libgd.so.2()(64bit)
On i386:
perl-PDL-2.4.10-6.fc19.i686 requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.16.2)
perl-PDL-2.4.10-6.fc19.i686 requires libgd.so.2
Please resolve this as soon as possible.


--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

Broken dependencies: perl-Padre



perl-Padre has broken dependencies in the F-20 tree:
On x86_64:
perl-Padre-0.90-6.fc18.noarch requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.16.0)
On i386:
perl-Padre-0.90-6.fc18.noarch requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.16.0)
On armhfp:
perl-Padre-0.90-6.fc18.noarch requires perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.16.0)
Please resolve this as soon as possible.


--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

Broken dependencies: perl-Language-Expr



perl-Language-Expr has broken dependencies in the F-20 tree:
On x86_64:
perl-Language-Expr-0.19-4.fc19.noarch requires 
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.16.2)
On i386:
perl-Language-Expr-0.19-4.fc19.noarch requires 
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.16.2)
On armhfp:
perl-Language-Expr-0.19-4.fc19.noarch requires 
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.16.2)
Please resolve this as soon as possible.


--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

Broken dependencies: perl-Language-Expr



perl-Language-Expr has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree:
On x86_64:
perl-Language-Expr-0.19-4.fc19.noarch requires 
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.16.2)
On i386:
perl-Language-Expr-0.19-4.fc19.noarch requires 
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.16.2)
On armhfp:
perl-Language-Expr-0.19-4.fc19.noarch requires 
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.16.2)
Please resolve this as soon as possible.


--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

File PadWalker-1.98.tar.gz uploaded to lookaside cache by pghmcfc

A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-PadWalker:

c4487293af8afd84b6739be296610e8f  PadWalker-1.98.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

[perl-PadWalker] Update to 1.98

commit 5343f0063681951d19f76a49841c8e43efbbef92
Author: Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org
Date:   Sun Oct 27 19:33:46 2013 +

Update to 1.98

- New upstream release 1.98
  - Improve peek_sub error handling (CPAN RT#89679)
- Specify all dependencies
- Don't use macros for commands
- Make %files list more explicit

 .gitignore  |4 +---
 perl-PadWalker.spec |   29 -
 sources |2 +-
 3 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore
index cf692fc..e6e6772 100644
--- a/.gitignore
+++ b/.gitignore
@@ -1,3 +1 @@
-PadWalker-1.9.tar.gz
-/PadWalker-1.92.tar.gz
-/PadWalker-1.96.tar.gz
+/PadWalker-[0-9.]*.tar.gz
diff --git a/perl-PadWalker.spec b/perl-PadWalker.spec
index bb25962..bfd2919 100644
--- a/perl-PadWalker.spec
+++ b/perl-PadWalker.spec
@@ -1,17 +1,21 @@
 Name:   perl-PadWalker
-Version:1.96
-Release:4%{?dist}
-Summary:Play with other peoples' lexical variables
+Version:1.98
+Release:1%{?dist}
+Summary:Play with other people's lexical variables
 License:GPL+ or Artistic
 Group:  Development/Libraries
 URL:http://search.cpan.org/dist/PadWalker/
 Source0:
http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/R/RO/ROBIN/PadWalker-%{version}.tar.gz
 BuildRequires:  perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker)
 # Run-time
+BuildRequires:  perl(DynaLoader)
 BuildRequires:  perl(Exporter)
+BuildRequires:  perl(strict)
+BuildRequires:  perl(vars)
+BuildRequires:  perl(warnings)
 # Tests:
 BuildRequires:  perl(Data::Dumper)
-Requires:   perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval `%{__perl} -V:version`; echo 
$version))
+Requires:   perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval `perl -V:version`; echo $version))
 
 %{?perl_default_filter}
 
@@ -24,7 +28,7 @@ those variables which are in scope at the point of the call.
 %setup -q -n PadWalker-%{version}
 
 %build
-%{__perl} Makefile.PL INSTALLDIRS=vendor OPTIMIZE=$RPM_OPT_FLAGS
+perl Makefile.PL INSTALLDIRS=vendor OPTIMIZE=$RPM_OPT_FLAGS
 make %{?_smp_mflags}
 
 %install
@@ -38,11 +42,18 @@ make test
 
 %files
 %doc Changes README
-%{perl_vendorarch}/auto/*
-%{perl_vendorarch}/PadWalker*
-%{_mandir}/man3/*
+%{perl_vendorarch}/auto/PadWalker/
+%{perl_vendorarch}/PadWalker.pm
+%{_mandir}/man3/PadWalker.3pm*
 
 %changelog
+* Sun Oct 27 2013 Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org - 1.98-1
+- Update to 1.98
+  - Improve peek_sub error handling (CPAN RT#89679)
+- Specify all dependencies
+- Don't use macros for commands
+- Make %%files list more explicit
+
 * Sun Aug 04 2013 Fedora Release Engineering rel-...@lists.fedoraproject.org 
- 1.96-4
 - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_20_Mass_Rebuild
 
@@ -78,7 +89,7 @@ make test
 - Update to 1.92.
 
 * Tue Dec 21 2010 Marcela Maslanova mmasl...@redhat.com - 1.9-5
-- 661697 rebuild for fixing problems with vendorach/lib
+- Rebuild to fix problems with vendorarch/lib (#661697)
 
 * Tue May 04 2010 Marcela Maslanova mmasl...@redhat.com - 1.9-4
 - Mass rebuild with perl-5.12.0
diff --git a/sources b/sources
index cc89104..263a8c7 100644
--- a/sources
+++ b/sources
@@ -1 +1 @@
-947686c045a636d507a7b4c4a1741dd3  PadWalker-1.96.tar.gz
+c4487293af8afd84b6739be296610e8f  PadWalker-1.98.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

File Software-License-0.103007.tar.gz uploaded to lookaside cache by pghmcfc

A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Software-License:

c7884f8de01cede923e79c8c367ecf48  Software-License-0.103007.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

[perl-Software-License] Update to 0.103007

commit 232beef32a6d951c8ab3a7fa4c99ef77baee8d27
Author: Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org
Date:   Sun Oct 27 20:10:06 2013 +

Update to 0.103007

- New upstream release 0.103007
  - Fix regex to allow guessing from meta things like perl_5
  - Replace 'use base' with 'use parent'
- BR: perl(Try::Tiny) for the test suite
- Update patch for building with old Test::More versions

 ... Software-License-0.103007-old-Test::More.patch |   11 +--
 perl-Software-License.spec |   16 
 sources|2 +-
 3 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/Software-License-0.103006-old-Test::More.patch 
b/Software-License-0.103007-old-Test::More.patch
similarity index 89%
rename from Software-License-0.103006-old-Test::More.patch
rename to Software-License-0.103007-old-Test::More.patch
index f8e9ede..d528289 100644
--- a/Software-License-0.103006-old-Test::More.patch
+++ b/Software-License-0.103007-old-Test::More.patch
@@ -32,6 +32,13 @@
  END_OF_FULLTEXT
 -
 -done_testing;
+--- t/guess_meta_license.t
 t/guess_meta_license.t
+@@ -49,4 +49,3 @@ foreach my $license_name (@cpan_meta_spe
+   ok(@guess, $license_name - @guess);
+ }
+ 
+-done_testing;
 --- t/meta-names.t
 +++ t/meta-names.t
 @@ -2,13 +2,16 @@
@@ -70,9 +77,9 @@
 -note 'Checking Changes';
 +diag 'Checking Changes';
  my $changes_file = 'Changes';
- my $newver = '0.103006';
+ my $newver = '0.103007';
  my $trial_token = '-TRIAL';
-@@ -14,8 +14,6 @@
+@@ -14,8 +14,6 @@ SKIP: {
  ok(_get_changes($newver), $changes_file has content for $newver);
  }
  
diff --git a/perl-Software-License.spec b/perl-Software-License.spec
index 401bb5b..6e32937 100644
--- a/perl-Software-License.spec
+++ b/perl-Software-License.spec
@@ -2,8 +2,8 @@
 %global old_test_more %(perl -MTest::More -e 'print (($Test::More::VERSION  
0.88) ? 1 : 0);' 2/dev/null || echo 0)
 
 Name:   perl-Software-License
-Version:0.103006
-Release:2%{?dist}
+Version:0.103007
+Release:1%{?dist}
 Summary:Package that provides templated software licenses
 License:GPL+ or Artistic
 Group:  Development/Libraries
@@ -11,20 +11,21 @@ URL:
http://search.cpan.org/dist/Software-License/
 # For unknown reasons this module URL is currently missing
 #Source0:
http://www.cpan.org/modules/by-module/Software/Software-License-%{version}.tar.gz
 Source0:
http://search.cpan.org/CPAN/authors/id/R/RJ/RJBS/Software-License-%{version}.tar.gz
-Patch1: Software-License-0.103006-old-Test::More.patch
+Patch1: Software-License-0.103007-old-Test::More.patch
 BuildRoot:  %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(id -nu)
 BuildArch:  noarch
-BuildRequires:  perl(base)
 BuildRequires:  perl(Carp)
 BuildRequires:  perl(Data::Section)
 BuildRequires:  perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker)
 BuildRequires:  perl(File::Spec)
 BuildRequires:  perl(IO::Dir)
 BuildRequires:  perl(Module::Load)
+BuildRequires:  perl(parent)
 BuildRequires:  perl(Sub::Install)
 BuildRequires:  perl(Text::Template)
 BuildRequires:  perl(Test::More)
 BuildRequires:  perl(Test::Pod)
+BuildRequires:  perl(Try::Tiny)
 Requires:   perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval `perl -V:version`; echo $version))
 
 %description
@@ -63,6 +64,13 @@ rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
 %{_mandir}/man3/Software::LicenseUtils.3pm*
 
 %changelog
+* Sun Oct 27 2013 Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org - 0.103007-1
+- Update to 0.103007
+  - Fix regex to allow guessing from meta things like perl_5
+  - Replace 'use base' with 'use parent'
+- BR: perl(Try::Tiny) for the test suite
+- Update patch for building with old Test::More versions
+
 * Mon Oct 21 2013 Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org - 0.103006-2
 - Update patch for building with old Test::More versions
 - Update core buildreqs for completeness
diff --git a/sources b/sources
index 1630f46..5182003 100644
--- a/sources
+++ b/sources
@@ -1 +1 @@
-caed1a42a645a98e816344f3a1c8c947  Software-License-0.103006.tar.gz
+c7884f8de01cede923e79c8c367ecf48  Software-License-0.103007.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

[perl-PadWalker/f20] Update to 1.98

Summary of changes:

  5343f00... Update to 1.98 (*)

(*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

[perl-Software-License/f20] (2 commits) ...Update to 0.103007

Summary of changes:

  ee29560... Fix EL-5 support and tidy up buildreqs (*)
  232beef... Update to 0.103007 (*)

(*) This commit already existed in another branch; no separate mail sent
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

[perl-Software-License] Created tag perl-Software-License-0.103007-1.fc21

The lightweight tag 'perl-Software-License-0.103007-1.fc21' was created 
pointing to:

 232beef... Update to 0.103007
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

[perl-Software-License] Created tag perl-Software-License-0.103007-1.fc20

The lightweight tag 'perl-Software-License-0.103007-1.fc20' was created 
pointing to:

 232beef... Update to 0.103007
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

[perl-PadWalker] Created tag perl-PadWalker-1.98-1.fc20

The lightweight tag 'perl-PadWalker-1.98-1.fc20' was created pointing to:

 5343f00... Update to 1.98
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

[perl-PadWalker] Created tag perl-PadWalker-1.98-1.fc21

The lightweight tag 'perl-PadWalker-1.98-1.fc21' was created pointing to:

 5343f00... Update to 1.98
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

[Bug 1023710] perl-Software-License-0.103007 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1023710



--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org ---
perl-Software-License-0.103007-1.fc20 has been submitted as an update for
Fedora 20.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Software-License-0.103007-1.fc20

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=u5ZqCEHc8Sa=cc_unsubscribe
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

[Bug 1021385] perl-Software-License-0.103006 is available

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1021385



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org ---
perl-Software-License-0.103007-1.fc20 has been submitted as an update for
Fedora 20.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Software-License-0.103007-1.fc20

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ilA1KgdQeCa=cc_unsubscribe
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

File Net-Amazon-EC2-0.23.tar.gz uploaded to lookaside cache by lkundrak

A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Net-Amazon-EC2:

678cf13562b3364b7fbb06bd120f5dc9  Net-Amazon-EC2-0.23.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

[perl-Net-Amazon-EC2] Bump version

commit fb2b8a0250e491b9184cb564dfd54f9947f2c105
Author: Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk
Date:   Mon Oct 28 00:32:20 2013 +0100

Bump version

 .gitignore   |1 +
 perl-Net-Amazon-EC2.spec |   16 
 sources  |2 +-
 3 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore
index 5b6771a..c43b789 100644
--- a/.gitignore
+++ b/.gitignore
@@ -1 +1,2 @@
 Net-Amazon-EC2-0.14.tar.gz
+/Net-Amazon-EC2-0.23.tar.gz
diff --git a/perl-Net-Amazon-EC2.spec b/perl-Net-Amazon-EC2.spec
index ebe142b..9f63a92 100644
--- a/perl-Net-Amazon-EC2.spec
+++ b/perl-Net-Amazon-EC2.spec
@@ -1,11 +1,11 @@
 Summary: Perl interface to the Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2)
 Name: perl-Net-Amazon-EC2
-Version: 0.14
-Release: 12%{?dist}
+Version: 0.23
+Release: 1%{?dist}
 License: GPL+ or Artistic
 Group: Development/Libraries
-URL: http://search.cpan.org/~jkim/Net-Amazon-EC2/
-Source0: 
http://search.cpan.org/CPAN/authors/id/J/JK/JKIM/Net-Amazon-EC2-%{version}.tar.gz
+URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Net-Amazon-EC2/
+Source0: 
http://search.cpan.org/CPAN/authors/id/M/MA/MALLEN/Net-Amazon-EC2-0.23.tar.gz
 
 
 BuildArch: noarch
@@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ BuildRequires: perl(XML::Simple) = 2.18
 # Tests:
 BuildRequires: perl(blib)
 BuildRequires: perl(Test::More)
+BuildRequires: perl(LWP::Protocol::https)
 
 
 Requires:  perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval `%{__perl} -V:version`; echo $version))
@@ -84,6 +85,7 @@ make test
 %{perl_vendorlib}/Net/Amazon/EC2/DescribeImagesResponse.pm
 %{perl_vendorlib}/Net/Amazon/EC2/DescribeInstanceAttributeResponse.pm
 %{perl_vendorlib}/Net/Amazon/EC2/DescribeKeyPairsResponse.pm
+%{perl_vendorlib}/Net/Amazon/EC2/DescribeTags.pm
 %{perl_vendorlib}/Net/Amazon/EC2/EbsBlockDevice.pm
 %{perl_vendorlib}/Net/Amazon/EC2/EbsInstanceBlockDeviceMapping.pm
 %{perl_vendorlib}/Net/Amazon/EC2/Error.pm
@@ -112,6 +114,7 @@ make test
 %{perl_vendorlib}/Net/Amazon/EC2/SnapshotAttribute.pm
 %{perl_vendorlib}/Net/Amazon/EC2/Snapshot.pm
 %{perl_vendorlib}/Net/Amazon/EC2/StateReason.pm
+%{perl_vendorlib}/Net/Amazon/EC2/TagSet.pm
 %{perl_vendorlib}/Net/Amazon/EC2/UserData.pm
 %{perl_vendorlib}/Net/Amazon/EC2/UserIdGroupPair.pm
 %{perl_vendorlib}/Net/Amazon/EC2/Volume.pm
@@ -129,6 +132,7 @@ make test
 %{_mandir}/man3/Net::Amazon::EC2::DescribeImagesResponse.3pm*
 %{_mandir}/man3/Net::Amazon::EC2::DescribeInstanceAttributeResponse.3pm.gz
 %{_mandir}/man3/Net::Amazon::EC2::DescribeKeyPairsResponse.3pm*
+%{_mandir}/man3/Net::Amazon::EC2::DescribeTags.3pm.gz
 %{_mandir}/man3/Net::Amazon::EC2::EbsBlockDevice.3pm.gz
 %{_mandir}/man3/Net::Amazon::EC2::EbsInstanceBlockDeviceMapping.3pm.gz
 %{_mandir}/man3/Net::Amazon::EC2::Error.3pm*
@@ -156,6 +160,7 @@ make test
 %{_mandir}/man3/Net::Amazon::EC2::Snapshot.3pm*
 %{_mandir}/man3/Net::Amazon::EC2::SnapshotAttribute.3pm.gz
 %{_mandir}/man3/Net::Amazon::EC2::StateReason.3pm.gz
+%{_mandir}/man3/Net::Amazon::EC2::TagSet.3pm.gz
 %{_mandir}/man3/Net::Amazon::EC2::UserData.3pm*
 %{_mandir}/man3/Net::Amazon::EC2::UserIdGroupPair.3pm*
 %{_mandir}/man3/Net::Amazon::EC2::Volume.3pm*
@@ -164,6 +169,9 @@ make test
 
 
 %changelog
+* Mon Oct 28 2013 Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk - 0.23-1
+- Update to a later upstream release
+
 * Thu Oct 24 2013 Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk - 0.14-12
 - Bulk sad and useless attempt at consistent SPEC file formatting
 
diff --git a/sources b/sources
index 1bbf733..374fbe8 100644
--- a/sources
+++ b/sources
@@ -1 +1 @@
-09a2f4a6f184f080d2e80204e331f092  Net-Amazon-EC2-0.14.tar.gz
+678cf13562b3364b7fbb06bd120f5dc9  Net-Amazon-EC2-0.23.tar.gz
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

[perl-Net-Amazon-EC2] Add missing BRs

commit 0fd09587c511233d1a5ca23a2743fcfb850edf12
Author: Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk
Date:   Mon Oct 28 01:04:33 2013 +0100

Add missing BRs

 perl-Net-Amazon-EC2.spec |2 ++
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/perl-Net-Amazon-EC2.spec b/perl-Net-Amazon-EC2.spec
index 9f63a92..0068ed2 100644
--- a/perl-Net-Amazon-EC2.spec
+++ b/perl-Net-Amazon-EC2.spec
@@ -35,7 +35,9 @@ BuildRequires: perl(XML::Simple) = 2.18
 # Tests:
 BuildRequires: perl(blib)
 BuildRequires: perl(Test::More)
+BuildRequires: perl(Test::Exception)
 BuildRequires: perl(LWP::Protocol::https)
+BuildRequires: perl(CPAN)
 
 
 Requires:  perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval `%{__perl} -V:version`; echo $version))
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel

[perl-Net-Amazon-EC2/f20] (3 commits) ...Add missing BRs