[Bug 221027] Review Request: LabPlot - Data Analysis and Visualization
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: LabPlot - Data Analysis and Visualization https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221027 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 03:44 EST --- Also add audiofile-devel to BuildRequires. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 209222] Review Request: prelude-lml - Prelude log analyzer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: prelude-lml - Prelude log analyzer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=209222
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779
nThis||
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 03:52 EST ---
Well,
* I cannot install -devel package.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# yum -y install prelude-lml-devel
Loading installonlyn plugin
Setting up Install Process
Setting up repositories
Reading repository metadata in from local files
Parsing package install arguments
Resolving Dependencies
-- Populating transaction set with selected packages. Please wait.
--- Package prelude-lml-devel.i386 0:0.9.8.1-2.fc7 set to be updated
-- Running transaction check
-- Processing Dependency: prelude-lml-0.9.8.1-2.fc7 for package:
prelude-lml-devel
-- Finished Dependency Resolution
Error: Missing Dependency: prelude-lml-0.9.8.1-2.fc7 is needed by package
prelude-lml-devel
For -devel package:
Requires: libprelude-devel, prelude-lml-%{version}-%{release}
should be:
Requires: libprelude-devel, prelude-lml = %{version}-%{release}
= For iconv issue:
?? I tested mockbuild on FC-devel/6/5, and all succeedes.
I cannot figure out why you fail on iconv, however, I
guess something wrong happened on your system (rpm -V glibc??)
For now I judge that your spec works.
= Debug issue is now corrected
= I leave the content of -devel package as it is.
= Other things are okay.
-
This package (prelude-lml) is now APPROVED by me.
Now the rest one is prelude-manager (assigned to me), isn't it?
I want to review it by tomorrow, however, I am also reviewing other
12 packages (plus also checking 2-3 packages) so it may get a bit
late to check prelude-manager...
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 210287] Review Request: Qt# - A set of qt bindings for mono
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Qt# - A set of qt bindings for mono https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=210287 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 03:59 EST --- Again ping? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221184] Review Request: libundo - Undo/redo information managing library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libundo - Undo/redo information managing library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221184 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 03:59 EST --- Some remarks: This package is causing me some gripes. 1. undo.h is being installed into /usr/include. 2. undo.h isn't C++-safe (it lacks the extern C guards 3. IMO, calling a library undo, letting it contain symbols being prefixed undo_* and letting its headers provide defines such as UNDO isn't necessarily a clever design. None of these issues are blockers for inclusion into FE, but at least #1 and #2 are sufficient reason for me not to want to dive into a formal review, sorry. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 209222] Review Request: prelude-lml - Prelude log analyzer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: prelude-lml - Prelude log analyzer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=209222 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 04:20 EST --- ok, -devel requirement is corrected and package is uploaded to the buildsystem. prelude-manager is still open, right, and I have 3 additional packages belonging to the prelude-suite: prewikka, samhain and snort. I will upload these packages the next couple of days. would be great if you could act as a sponsor here as well. If I could help you in any way, let me know. Thanks, Thorsten -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 220967] Review Request: libscigraphica - A library of gtk+ widgets for SciGraphica
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libscigraphica - A library of gtk+ widgets for SciGraphica https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220967 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 05:55 EST --- Seemingly okay. I leave this package as the judgment by Paul. One question. What is the .c souce codes included in -devel package? -- /usr/include/scigraphica-2.0/scigraphica/algorithms/Axb_core.c /usr/include/scigraphica-2.0/scigraphica/algorithms/lm_core.c -- -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 219930] Review Request: lxpanel - A lightweight X11 desktop panel
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lxpanel - A lightweight X11 desktop panel https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219930 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 06:20 EST --- (In reply to comment #3) Sebastian, have you heard something from Chung-Yen? If not, I'm going to review this package tomorrow. Sadly, I've heard nothing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 184530] Review Request: perl-RPM2
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-RPM2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=184530 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 06:21 EST --- (In reply to comment #22) What's the status on this review? The thing that was holding it up originally was the license. This has been fixed by a new upstream release (0.67) which states that it's licensed under the same terms as perl itself (i.e. GPL or Artistic). In Comment #21, Robin was going to check whether Bug #73921 and Bug #129724 were still present before going ahead with owning the package in Extras, I have created an updated SRPM for 0.67 that brings the package much more into line with the way perl modules are normally written for Extras. This addresses the directory ownership issue of Bug #73921. I haven't checked the status of Bug #129724 but that looks to me more like an issue for upstream rather than a packaging issue, and I don't think that should block the package from being imported. Updated SRPM: http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/perl-RPM2/perl-RPM2-0.67-1.src.rpm Updated Spec: http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/perl-RPM2/perl-RPM2.spec Robin, what's the state of play for this package from your point of view? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 215569] Review Request: beryl-vidcap - Beryl OpenGL window and compositing manager video capture utility
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beryl-vidcap - Beryl OpenGL window and compositing manager video capture utility https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=215569 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 06:30 EST --- Well, a Happy new year to everyone. Jarod, it seems that you updated beryl related packages to 0.1.4, so how about this package? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 220968] Review Request: scigraphica - Scientific application for data analysis and technical graphics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: scigraphica - Scientific application for data analysis and technical graphics https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220968 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 06:31 EST --- Seemingly okay (quickly checked), I leave this package as judgment by Paul. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 220968] Review Request: scigraphica - Scientific application for data analysis and technical graphics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: scigraphica - Scientific application for data analysis and technical graphics https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220968 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 06:40 EST --- ONE NOTE: On current FC-devel, scigraphica (actually libscigraphica) causes segv on exit. However, I suspect that this is due to ORBit2 or gtk2 or something else (strongly suspect ORBit2). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221256] New: Review Request: etswitch - A *nix 'minimizer' for a few games
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221256 Summary: Review Request: etswitch - A *nix 'minimizer' for a few games Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://rafalzaq.nonlogic.org/fedora/etswitch/etswitch.spec SRPM URL: http://rafalzaq.nonlogic.org/fedora/etswitch/etswitch-0.1.14-1.fc6.src.rpm Description: ETswitch is a *nix 'minimizer' for a few games. Supported games: Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory | Quake III: Arena | QuakeForge | Quake2(Quake2Forge) | DOOM3 | America's Army: Operations | Nexuiz | Scorched 3D | Alien Arena 2006 / GE / UE / 2007 | Cube | Tux Racer | jDoom / jHexen / jHeretic | S.C.O.U.R.G.E | OpenTTD | Trigger | Sauerbraten | GLtron | SuperTux | Pingus | Neverball / Neverputt | UFO2000 | Kobo Deluxe | chromium B.S.U. | Wormux | Warzone 2100 | Secret Maryo Chronicles | Descent 2 This is one of my first packages so I'm looking for a sponsor. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221256] Review Request: etswitch - A *nix 'minimizer' for a few games
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: etswitch - A *nix 'minimizer' for a few games https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221256 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: etswitch - A|Review Request: etswitch - A |*nix 'minimizer' for a few |*nix 'minimizer' for a few |games |games OtherBugsDependingO||177841 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 195585] Review Request: tetex-fonts-hebrew
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tetex-fonts-hebrew https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195585 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Component|tetex-fontools |Package Review --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 07:33 EST --- The component field for package reviews must stay to Package Review. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 219915] Review Request: kio_resources - Kio_resources provides the resources protocol for KDE
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kio_resources - Kio_resources provides the resources protocol for KDE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219915 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 219930] Review Request: lxpanel - A lightweight X11 desktop panel
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lxpanel - A lightweight X11 desktop panel https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219930 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 08:05 EST --- lxmusic needs xmms2 (but xmms2 is not included in FE), so I prefer not to include lxmusic lxsession seems not work in FC6 (I have tried it before) So, I think only lxpanel and pcmanfm in Extras is enough. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 219930] Review Request: lxpanel - A lightweight X11 desktop panel
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lxpanel - A lightweight X11 desktop panel https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219930 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 08:33 EST --- (In reply to comment #5) lxmusic needs xmms2 (but xmms2 is not included in FE), so I prefer not to include lxmusic Yeah, I already tried to patch it for bmp/audacious, but it was too much work for only a tiny program. lxsession seems not work in FC6 (I have tried it before) So, I think only lxpanel and pcmanfm in Extras is enough. So is it ok for you if Sebastian takes over lxpanel? You could submit your pcmanfm package for review then, if you like. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216534] Review Request: gocr - GNU Optical Character Recognition program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gocr - GNU Optical Character Recognition program https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216534 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 09:34 EST --- * rpmlint says: E: gocr explicit-lib-dependency libjpeg I posted a comment above asking for that Requires, I guess there is an executable from libjpeg used for conversion. * follow guidelines X License is GPL, not included. You should ask upstream to include the license file, otherwise he may not be able to defend his license. Some file with an author and no license. This should be investigated and certainly corrected upstream. Except from otsu it is the upstream author, so ther shouldn't be much trouble. Maybe the upstream author thinks that no license means public domain, but it is not the case, he should either remove the author notice or explicitly license it in the public domain. otsu.c has no license but an author (in fact 2, as shown by looking at the comments). the following code was send by Ryan Dibble [EMAIL PROTECTED] pnm.c has no license but an author /* (c) Joerg Schulenburg 2000-2006 pcx.c and tga.c have no license but an author // Joerg Schulenburg Mai99 // Joerg Schulenburg Mai99 * build and run fine * right Requires and BuildRequires. Maybe a comment explaining the need for the requires could be in order. * %files section right * sane provides * match upstream f989fe8e24f82d19c8ce55df15784e15 gocr-0.43.tar.gz The only remaining blocker is the license issue. A statement from upstream and a promise to fix things for the next release would be enough for me. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 211807] Review Request: firefox2 - Mozilla Firefox 2.0 Web browser for FC6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: firefox2 - Mozilla Firefox 2.0 Web browser for FC6 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=211807 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 09:35 EST --- So you have the packager saying one thing and everyone in the Fedora community saying another thing instead of the community rallying behind a packager's decision on an issue. So, now people start looking for ways to get around the packager's decision. Maybe we can have an extras package, or put something into updates-testing, etc. because nobody in the community thinks the packager's decision is good enough. Why on earth would anyone want to be a packager in this sort of community? Why would I want to continue contributing, after 3 years of Fedora package maintainer and 6 years of upstream mozilla.org work including work on the release team, want to continue contributing to a community project where I apparently haven't garnered enough respect to gain community backing on a technical, practical, and compatability decision, even if it is a little unpopular? The we understand your points, but we want it anyway mentality is getting a little old. Can't we simply tell people Fedora 6 has 1.5, Fedora 7 will have Firefox 2? If the success of FC6 is so dependent on a single package being upgraded, then something is completely off. Yes, I am aware that people want it. That doesn't mean we should bend over backwards to do it. If that were the case, we'd have shipped all sorts of media codecs by now. But we do what's right, not necessarily what's popular. So, how about a little support? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 211807] Review Request: firefox2 - Mozilla Firefox 2.0 Web browser for FC6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: firefox2 - Mozilla Firefox 2.0 Web browser for FC6 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=211807 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 10:17 EST --- I have to agree with Christopher on this one... There's nothing so earth-shatteringly cool in FF2 that's worth the pain (and ill will) of shoehorning it into FC6. FF is just too deeply integrated into various bits of the desktop anymore. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 211807] Review Request: firefox2 - Mozilla Firefox 2.0 Web browser for FC6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: firefox2 - Mozilla Firefox 2.0 Web browser for FC6 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=211807 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 10:29 EST --- I also agree with Christopher, the default FF in FC6 is 1.5 and that is fine with me, if people want to play with with FF 2.0 in FC6, they can get it from the Remi 3. part repository, so let Christopher do real some work on future version of firefox and close this request. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 215569] Review Request: beryl-vidcap - Beryl OpenGL window and compositing manager video capture utility
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beryl-vidcap - Beryl OpenGL window and compositing manager video capture utility https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=215569 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 10:45 EST --- Yeah, once I get all the 0.1.4 bits pushed for FC6, I plan to start working on this one again. Looks as if it may be a bit of work with seom broken out now (in the long run, it would appear seom needs to be packaged by itself and BR/R by beryl-vidcap). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216534] Review Request: gocr - GNU Optical Character Recognition program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gocr - GNU Optical Character Recognition program https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216534 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 10:58 EST --- (In reply to comment #11) X License is GPL, not included. You should ask upstream to include the license file, otherwise he may not be able to defend his license. Ooops, sorry it is included. The only issue is with files with author and no license. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 211807] Review Request: firefox2 - Mozilla Firefox 2.0 Web browser for FC6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: firefox2 - Mozilla Firefox 2.0 Web browser for FC6 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=211807 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 11:11 EST --- Christopher, I think you're taking this -way- too seriously. Life is too short to get upset about a few comments on bugzilla. You are the maintainer, and you get to say the last word. People may accept it, or cry about it, but it doesn't change the basic fact that, well, you get to say the final word. Either way, there's no reason for you to take it personally - no matter how high the shouting/crying/complaining get. As for me, I'm lurking here for a stable SRPMs. Once its out, I'll do what I did back when FF 1.5 was released and FC4 only had FF 1.0.x - take the -devel SRPM, adapt it, and build it myself. Being a KDE user, I don't risk blowing my DE stack, and if something breaks (and things do break...), I have one man to blame - me. - Gilboa -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221256] Review Request: etswitch - A *nix 'minimizer' for a few games
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: etswitch - A *nix 'minimizer' for a few games https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221256 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 11:31 EST --- I am not sponsored, it is prereview. * rpmlint output: NULL * package is named well * spec file name is good * package meets Packaging Guidelines * package is licensed with an GPL open-source compatible license * License field in spec file matches actual license * license file is included in %doc * Spec is written in English (probably American) * The spec file for the package is legible. * md5sums are matching (4f924bff0bb4fcded8cb73ff338b8563) * package successfully compiles on i386 * BuildRequires listed well (build succcesfully in mock) * no locales * there does not need to %post and %postun sections * package owns directories probably well * no duplicates in %files * every %files section includes %defattr * proper %clean section * package consistently use macros * the *.desktop is installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 187243] Review Request: lazarus : IDE and RAD tool for the free pascal compiler (fpc)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lazarus : IDE and RAD tool for the free pascal compiler (fpc) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187243 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 11:39 EST --- I've updated to lazarus-0.9.20. Please review. SRPM: http://www.cnoc.nl/fpc/lazarus-0.9.20-1.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 220393] Review Request: synopsis - Source-code Introspection Tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: synopsis - Source-code Introspection Tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220393
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Review Request: Synopsis - |Review Request: synopsis -
|Source-code Introspection |Source-code Introspection
|Tool|Tool
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 12:15 EST ---
Well, still needs a lot of fixes.
Please read the URLs I have already introduced.
* Perhaps this package should use python_sitearch, not
python_sitelib (see:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Python)
* Check Group. In my opinion:
main package - Development/Tools
devel package - Development/Libraries (rather mandatory)
doc - Documentation (rather mandatory)
* As I commented above, move all documentation files from
/usr/share/doc/Synopsis to /usr/share/doc/%{name}-%{version}.
And.. 3 files README COPYING NEWS are included in both
main package and -doc package (should be only in -main
package)
* Still Fedora specific compilation flags are not complitely
passed. (Using CPPFLAGS as well as CFLAGS, CXXFLAGS seems
to work).
* Still mockbuild fails.
For me, another requirement of pkgconfig for BuildRequires
seems to work.
* Still directory ownership issue is not treated completely.
(%{py_sitedir}/Synopsis/Parsers is now owned by any package)
Please check if all directories created during installation
of synopsis related rpms are owned correctly by packages.
* The usage of -p option of %post/%postun is on the section
Shared libraries of
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets
* Would you explain why you create another -idl package?
Requires for main package and -idl package are currently
same, so currently creating -idl subpackage creates no
benefit.
* Rpmlint complains:
W: synopsis-devel summary-ended-with-dot The Synopsis development environment.
Summary should not end with a dot.
Note: when you modify spec file with no Version change,
please increase Release number.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 211807] Review Request: firefox2 - Mozilla Firefox 2.0 Web browser for FC6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: firefox2 - Mozilla Firefox 2.0 Web browser for FC6 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=211807 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 12:19 EST --- Christopher, please don't take this as the community trying to bypass you... I can't speak for the community, but I really appreciate all the work you do on firefox, but with the fedora package and working with upstream. Lots of people want 2.0. It sounds like 2.0 has regressions vs 1.5 currently. :( I would have liked to see this as an option in fc6, but I understand that it would be a headache. I hope the regressions can be dealt with and you at some point are able to ship it in fc6 (either as a main firefox upgrade, or as a firefox2 parallel installabe package). So, currently I would be all for closing this request... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 220393] Review Request: synopsis - Source-code Introspection Tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: synopsis - Source-code Introspection Tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220393 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 12:21 EST --- Created an attachment (id=144720) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=144720action=view) Mock build log of (new) synopsis-0.9-1 Mockbuild log of (new) synopsis-0.9-1 on FC-devel i386. You can see: --- 675 checking for suffix of object files... o 676 checking whether we are using the GNU C++ compiler... yes 677 checking whether g++ accepts -g... yes 678 /builddir/build/BUILD/synopsis-0.9/tests/configure: line 1844: pkg-config: command not found 679 /builddir/build/BUILD/synopsis-0.9/tests/configure: line 1845: pkg-config: command not found 680 checking for ... /usr/bin/python 681 configure: creating ./config.status 682 config.status: creating QMTest/configuration --- Also: --- 728 make: Entering directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/synopsis-0.9/build/ctemp.linux-i686/src' 729 generating dependencies for tools/display-symbols.cc 730 /bin/sh -ec 'g++ -M -I . -I /builddir/build/BUILD/synopsis-0.9/src -I /builddir/build/BUILD/synopsis-0.9/src/Synopsis/gc/include /builddir/build/BUILD/synopsis-0.9/src/tools/display-symbols.cc | sed s,display-symbols\\.o[ :]*,tools/display-symbols\\.d tools/display-symbols\\.o : ,g tools/display-symbols.d' -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 184530] Review Request: perl-RPM2
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-RPM2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=184530 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 12:24 EST --- Paul, the new spec file looks great, and I agree that bug #129724 is a bug in the upstream package. My impression is that Chip won't be fixing it anytime soon, so if we're ok with living with it, the package is fine as far as I'm concerned. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 211807] Review Request: firefox2 - Mozilla Firefox 2.0 Web browser for FC6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: firefox2 - Mozilla Firefox 2.0 Web browser for FC6 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=211807 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 12:31 EST --- (In reply to comment #38) Christopher, please don't take this as the community trying to bypass you... I can't speak for the community, but I really appreciate all the work you do on firefox, but with the fedora package and working with upstream. +1 Lots of people want 2.0. Agreed. I even think most people will agree with the There's nothing [...] earth-shatteringly cool in FF2 after they tried, but they will proably want to try it own their own I would have liked to see this as an option in fc6, but I understand that it would be a headache. I hope the regressions can be dealt with and you at some point are able to ship it in fc6 (either as a main firefox upgrade, or as a firefox2 parallel installabe package). So, currently I would be all for closing this request... +1 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 217232] Review Request: keyTouch
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: keyTouch https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217232 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO|CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |201449 nThis|| Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]| |) | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 12:33 EST --- Now I regard this bug as stalled. Closing as NOTABUG, making this block bug FE-DEADREVIEW -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 184530] Review Request: perl-RPM2
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-RPM2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=184530 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 12:38 EST --- (In reply to comment #24) Paul, the new spec file looks great, and I agree that bug #129724 is a bug in the upstream package. My impression is that Chip won't be fixing it anytime soon, so if we're ok with living with it, the package is fine as far as I'm concerned. Great stuff. I already approved the package earlier so feel free to import and built it etc. (I assume you're still happy to own this package?) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 218232] Review Request: php-pear-Math-Stats - Classes to calculate statistical parameters
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: php-pear-Math-Stats - Classes to calculate statistical parameters Alias: pear-Math-Stats https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218232 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 12:39 EST --- Review: * rpmlint is quiet (and that's good ;-)) * I have no objection to names of package and spec file * sources match upstream (md5: ffc0b653e5e2985113262a5299ebe69b) * package is licensed under PHP open-source compatible license which is properly mentioned in License field and included in %doc * no problems with building on fc6/x86_64 * package isn't designed to be relocatable * %post and %postun are present (like in a template) * package meets every Guidelines it should * everything looks very similar to a php-pear spec template and everything is good :) There's even no need to set a FE-REVIEW blocker. Me and everything else can say that: ___ Approved! --- \ ,__, \ (oo) (__))\ ||--|| * -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221108] Review Request: openarena - first person shooter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: openarena - first person shooter Alias: openarena https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| Alias||openarena -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 219972] Review Request: poker-network - A poker server, client and abstract user interface library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: poker-network - A poker server, client and abstract user interface library Alias: poker-network https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219972 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||171543 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 12:45 EST --- Reblocking bug #171543 even though twisted-core and web are in FC6, it was agreed that we wait until all python-twisted packages are in FC6 before branching to provide the smothest upgrade path possible. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 218232] Review Request: php-pear-Math-Stats - Classes to calculate statistical parameters
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: php-pear-Math-Stats - Classes to calculate statistical parameters Alias: pear-Math-Stats https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218232 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 13:04 EST --- - Imported into CVS - Entry added to owners.list - Tagged and Built on devel - FC-5/6 branch request made Thanks for the review! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 218230] Review Request: php-pear-Image-Canvas - Common interface to image drawing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: php-pear-Image-Canvas - Common interface to image drawing Alias: pear-Image-Canvas https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218230 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 13:28 EST --- Spec URL: http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/php-pear-Image-Canvas.spec SRPM URL: http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/php-pear-Image-Canvas-0.3.0-3.src.rpm %changelog * Wed Jan 03 2007 Christopher Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0.3.0-3 - No longer remove PDF.php file - Add README.Fedora file exlaining requirements for PDF.php -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 220185] Review Request: kvm - Kernel Based Virtual Machine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kvm - Kernel Based Virtual Machine https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220185 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 13:31 EST --- (In reply to comment #8) Suggest calling the binary 'kvm' instead of qemu-kvm, and adding a softlink to the qemu manual page. Not calling the binary kvm due to potential confusion with the little kvm wrapper script in the tarball; although I'm somewhat interested in getting the script a little bit more suitable so that I can just include it. But I'll do that via kvm-devel Alternatively, merge it to the qemu package. That's perhaps a little premature at this moment. Yeah, seems a little early still. Once everything is upstream, I'll be more than glad to have qemu obsolete this (although if there are some useful tools around using qemu+kvm, then maybe this just becomes the tools package :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 220185] Review Request: kvm - Kernel Based Virtual Machine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kvm - Kernel Based Virtual Machine https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220185 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 13:33 EST --- (In reply to comment #9) Mock build failed. Apparently, I can't type/save files when I'm actually done with them... http://people.redhat.com/~katzj/kvm/kvm-7-4.src.rpm and http://people.redhat.com/~katzj/kvm/kvm.spec updated. For real this time! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 218230] Review Request: php-pear-Image-Canvas - Common interface to image drawing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: php-pear-Image-Canvas - Common interface to image drawing Alias: pear-Image-Canvas https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218230 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 13:34 EST --- oops this bit got cut off from changelog paste above: - No longer own Image directory -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221307] New: Review Request: python-twisted-lore - Twisted documentation system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221307 Summary: Review Request: python-twisted-lore - Twisted documentation system Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://thomas.apestaart.org/download/pkg/fedora-6-x86_64-extras/python-twisted-lore-0.2.0-4.fc6/python-twisted-lore.spec SRPM URL: http://thomas.apestaart.org/download/pkg/fedora-6-x86_64-extras/python-twisted-lore-0.2.0-4.fc6/python-twisted-lore-0.2.0-4.fc6.src.rpm Description: Twisted is an event-based framework for internet applications. Lore is a complete documentation system based on XHTML and can generate documentation into other formats such as PDF, HTML. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221308] New: Review Request: python-twisted-mail - A Twisted Mail library, server and client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221308 Summary: Review Request: python-twisted-mail - A Twisted Mail library, server and client Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://thomas.apestaart.org/download/pkg/fedora-6-x86_64-extras/python-twisted-mail-0.3.0-4.fc6/python-twisted-mail.spec SRPM URL: http://thomas.apestaart.org/download/pkg/fedora-6-x86_64-extras/python-twisted-mail-0.3.0-4.fc6/python-twisted-mail-0.3.0-4.fc6.src.rpm Description: Twisted is an event-based framework for internet applications. Twisted Mail contains high-level, efficient protocol implementations for both clients and servers of SMTP, POP3, and IMAP4. Additionally, it contains an out of the box combination SMTP/POP3 virtual-hosting mail server. Also included is a read/write Maildir implementation and a basic Mail Exchange calculator. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221309] New: Review Request: python-twisted-news - Twisted News is an NNTP server and programming library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221309 Summary: Review Request: python-twisted-news - Twisted News is an NNTP server and programming library Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://thomas.apestaart.org/download/pkg/fedora-6-x86_64-extras/python-twisted-news-0.2.0-3.fc6/python-twisted-news.spec SRPM URL: http://thomas.apestaart.org/download/pkg/fedora-6-x86_64-extras/python-twisted-news-0.2.0-3.fc6/python-twisted-news-0.2.0-3.fc6.x86_64.rpm Description: Twisted is an event-based framework for internet applications. Twisted News is an NNTP protocol (Usenet) programming library. The library contains server and client protocol implementations. A simple NNTP server is also provided. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221310] New: Review Request: python-twisted - Twisted is an event-based framework for internet applications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221310 Summary: Review Request: python-twisted - Twisted is an event- based framework for internet applications Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://thomas.apestaart.org/download/pkg/fedora-6-x86_64-extras/python-twisted-2.4.0-2.fc6/python-twisted.spec SRPM URL: http://thomas.apestaart.org/download/pkg/fedora-6-x86_64-extras/python-twisted-2.4.0-2.fc6/python-twisted-2.4.0-2.fc6.src.rpm Description: Twisted is an event-based framework for internet applications. It includes a web server, a telnet server, a chat server, a news server, a generic client and server for remote object access, and APIs for creating new protocols and services. Twisted supports integration of the Tk, GTK+, Qt or wxPython event loop with its main event loop. The Win32 event loop is also supported, as is basic support for running servers on top of Jython. Installing this package brings all Twisted sub-packages into your system. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 211807] Review Request: firefox2 - Mozilla Firefox 2.0 Web browser for FC6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: firefox2 - Mozilla Firefox 2.0 Web browser for FC6 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=211807 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 13:56 EST --- (In reply to comment #37) Why is this bug even being considered when we already have: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Firefox2 I can't access that page for some reason - anyway, just make sure the RPMs made by Gawain Lynch are mentioned on that page and then, yes, this bug report might become a little bit redundant. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221309] Review Request: python-twisted-news - Twisted News is an NNTP server and programming library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-twisted-news - Twisted News is an NNTP server and programming library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221309 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||221310 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216106] Review Request: python-twisted-words - Twisted Words contains Instant Messaging implementations
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-twisted-words - Twisted Words contains Instant Messaging implementations https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216106 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||221310 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216105] Review Request: python-twisted-web - Twisted web server, programmable in Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-twisted-web - Twisted web server, programmable in Python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216105 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||221310 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221307] Review Request: python-twisted-lore - Twisted documentation system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-twisted-lore - Twisted documentation system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221307 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||221310 nThis|| [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||171543 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221309] Review Request: python-twisted-news - Twisted News is an NNTP server and programming library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-twisted-news - Twisted News is an NNTP server and programming library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221309 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||171543 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216103] Review Request: python-twisted-names - A Twisted DNS implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-twisted-names - A Twisted DNS implementation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216103 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||221310 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216103] Review Request: python-twisted-names - A Twisted DNS implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-twisted-names - A Twisted DNS implementation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216103 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||221310 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 208169] Review Request: python-twisted-core - An asynchronous networking framework written in Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-twisted-core - An asynchronous networking framework written in Python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208169 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||221310 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 208169] Review Request: python-twisted-core - An asynchronous networking framework written in Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-twisted-core - An asynchronous networking framework written in Python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208169 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||221310 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216102] Review Request: python-twisted-conch - Twisted SSHv2 implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-twisted-conch - Twisted SSHv2 implementation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216102 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||221310 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216104] Review Request: python-twisted-runner - process management library and inetd replacement
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-twisted-runner - process management library and inetd replacement https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216104 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||221310 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221308] Review Request: python-twisted-mail - A Twisted Mail library, server and client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-twisted-mail - A Twisted Mail library, server and client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221308 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||221310 nThis|| [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||171543 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221308] Review Request: python-twisted-mail - A Twisted Mail library, server and client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-twisted-mail - A Twisted Mail library, server and client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221308 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||221310 nThis|| [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||171543 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216104] Review Request: python-twisted-runner - process management library and inetd replacement
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-twisted-runner - process management library and inetd replacement https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216104 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||221310 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178922 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 14:14 EST --- Next problem... Without the core sounds, an attempt to use blind transfer disconnects the call. [Jan 3 12:02:06] WARNING[7091]: file.c:553 ast_openstream_full: File pbx-transfer does not exist in any format [Jan 3 12:02:06] WARNING[7091]: file.c:805 ast_streamfile: Unable to open pbx-transfer (format 0x8 (alaw)): No such file or directory == Spawn extension (remote, s, 2) exited non-zero on 'Zap/2-1' -- Hungup 'Zap/2-1' If we can't freely redistribute the core sounds, should the package maybe include an easy way to download them? (Or is the license on the sounds free enough that they can be distributed in a separate package?) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 219610] Review Request: uncrustify - code beautifier
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: uncrustify - code beautifier https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219610 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||UPSTREAM -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178922 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 14:34 EST --- Hmmm yeah, I keep forgetting about the sounds... I don't think that the sounds free enough to be included in Fedora, because ISTR that they place restrictions on using the sounds with anything but Asterisk. I wasn't able to find the exact wording of the licensing though. They also don't include the source (the high-quality masters) but that may or may not be a problem. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221175] Review Request: libisofs - A library to create ISO 9660 disk images
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libisofs - A library to create ISO 9660 disk images https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221175 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 15:26 EST --- http://people.redhat.com/jkeating/extras/libisofs-0.2.4-1.src.rpm New upstream tarball (emailed to me, they haven't posted it on their website yet, Ill wait for that before importing/building). This should resolve the remaining issues. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 211807] Review Request: firefox2 - Mozilla Firefox 2.0 Web browser for FC6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: firefox2 - Mozilla Firefox 2.0 Web browser for FC6 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=211807 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 15:27 EST --- Chris, I just noticed http://christopher.aillon.org/blog/dev/mozilla/20061204-linux-alliance.html and http://steelgryphon.com/blog/?p=96 linked off of http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Firefox2 That's great news! Thank you for your efforts in getting better linux support upstream. Please keep us informed of progress on this front in your blog or on the wiki. Your documenting of firefox integration issues are important and will help spur collaboration in solving them. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199405] Review Request: vtk - The Visualization Toolkit - A high level 3D visualization library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: vtk - The Visualization Toolkit - A high level 3D visualization library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199405 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 15:52 EST --- Upstream comments in http://public.kitware.com/pipermail/vtkusers/2007-January/088901.html In VTK, the only code that is patented is the mpeg2 encoder. All the other patented algorithms were either replaced or their patents expired. The inclusion of mpeg2 in VTK is an oversight. We will make it an external dependency in the next patch of VTK 5. I would suggest waiting until then to include VTK in a distribution. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178922 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 15:52 EST --- OpenPBX sounds are OK though -- can we use those? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 178922] Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: asterisk - The Open Source PBX https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178922 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 16:04 EST --- (In reply to comment #80) OpenPBX sounds are OK though -- can we use those? The majority of the OpenPBX and Asterisk sounds probably still use the same script (except for OpenPBX being substituted for Asterisk of course). How annoying those differences between the scripts would take some experimentation. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221108] Review Request: openarena - first person shooter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: openarena - first person shooter
Alias: openarena
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221108
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779
nThis||
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 16:11 EST ---
REVIEW CHECKLIST
- rpmlint output:
W: openarena-data no-documentation
permissible although I usually suggest atleast placing the license file in the
sub-package.
- package named according to package naming guidelines
- spec filename matches %{name}
- package meets packaging guidelines
- licensed with open source compatible license
- license field matches actual license
- license file included in %doc
- spec file written in American english
- spec file legible
although I would suggest a little extra whitespace in a couple places to make
parsing the spec file easier.
- sources match upstream
0c2c27456a11331d61448278a1e9aaad /home/chris/oa060.tar.gz
- package successfully compiles and builds on FC6 x86_64
- all build dependencies listed in BR
- no locales
- no shared libraries stored in ldconfig default path
- package is not relocatable
- package owns all directories it creates
- directories it does not create owned by default packages
- no duplicates listed in %files
- file permissions set properly
- package contains proper %clean section
- macro usage consistent
- package contains code
- no large documentation files
- files in %doc do not affect runtime
- no header files or static libraries
- no pkgconfig files
- no library files with suffix
- no need for devel subpackage
- no .la files
- package contains proper .desktop file
- package does not own files or directories owned by other packages
*** APPROVED ***
SHOULD FIX
- add %doc doc/COPYING to data subpackage
- remove LINUXNOTES from %doc
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 204495] Review Request: perl-GStreamer - GStreamer Perl module
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-GStreamer - GStreamer Perl module https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204495 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 16:28 EST --- Trying to rebuild on devel the tests failed: t/GstRegistry...ok 1/21undef is not of type GStreamer::PluginFeature at t/GstRegistry.t line 22. # Looks like you planned 21 tests but only ran 3. # Looks like your test died just after 3. t/GstRegistry...dubious Test returned status 255 (wstat 65280, 0xff00) DIED. FAILED tests 4-21 Failed 18/21 tests, 14.29% okay gstreamer-0.10.11-1.fc7 gstreamer-devel-0.10.11-1.fc7 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 210287] Review Request: Qt# - A set of qt bindings for mono
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Qt# - A set of qt bindings for mono https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=210287 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO|ASSIGNED Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] | |johnsons.co.uk) | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 18:27 EST --- Sorry, I'll have some time to look at it on Friday -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221349] New: Review Request: doodle - tool to quickly search the documents on a computer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221349 Summary: Review Request: doodle - tool to quickly search the documents on a computer Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://karlik.nonlogic.org/doodle/doodle.spec SRPM URL: http://karlik.nonlogic.org/doodle/doodle-0.6.6-1.src.rpm Description: Doodle is a tool to quickly search the documents on a computer. Doodle builds an index using meta-data contained in the documents and allows fast searches on the resulting database. Doodle uses libextractor to support obtaining meta-data from various file-formats. The database used by doodle is a suffix tree, resulting in fast lookups. Doodle supports approximate searches. Two things to reviewers: 1. I had to comment _smp_mflags, because when this flag is ON, the rpm does not build. I sent mail to author of this program. 2. To build doodle need libextractor-devel. This is not in fedora-extras, but the Review request is bug #214087 I am not sponsored. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 214087] Review Request: libextractor -- Simple library for keyword extraction
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libextractor -- Simple library for keyword extraction https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=214087 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||221349 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221349] Review Request: doodle - tool to quickly search the documents on a computer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: doodle - tool to quickly search the documents on a computer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221349 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||214087 OtherBugsDependingO||177841 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 211807] Review Request: firefox2 - Mozilla Firefox 2.0 Web browser for FC6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: firefox2 - Mozilla Firefox 2.0 Web browser for FC6 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=211807 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||WONTFIX --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 18:50 EST --- Wow! In the world of open source things tend to happen because people have an itch they want to scratch. That is what happened here. I figured out a way to build this in parallel and posted some details to -devel for others who should know the risks and wanted to do it themselves. Period! I was asked by many people to put a package up and that is what I did. I never meant to cause anyone grief and the reaction to this bug says that obviously one should not have ever tried. Chris, I am truly sorry. Bug closed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 208737] Review Request: ivman - Generic handler for HAL events
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ivman - Generic handler for HAL events https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208737 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 19:13 EST --- Yeah, that does seem suboptimal... Is it enough to keep the package from being published though? Perhaps you should push this version to devel and keep trying to get upstream to fix the issue? Did you ask about this on the upstream mailing list? Sourceforge seems broken here and I can't view the mailling list archives for this project. They do have an issue tracker, perhaps it would be good to file a bug/enhancement request there? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 208737] Review Request: ivman - Generic handler for HAL events
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ivman - Generic handler for HAL events https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208737 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 19:26 EST --- I asked on the mailing list. In fact the maintainer isn't very interested in maintaining ivman anymore, so I think it is better to wait before building. Moreover I have modified locally what is in fedora cvs to mount synchronously, and also I have updated to 0.6.13 (2 patches are upstreamed), but I still would like to wait for things to settle down upstream. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 220683] Review Request: rubygems - the Ruby standard for packaging ruby libraries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rubygems - the Ruby standard for packaging ruby libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220683 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 20:19 EST --- 1. ok. 2. ok. Yeah, it's really not possible to tell currently what the license is based on just looking at the package as shipped. ;( Do you know when they might address this? I hate to approve and ship the package without a known for sure license. I wish they would have at least said in the package that the license was ruby/GPL, but they didn't. 3. ok. 4. ok, looks good here. 5. ah, ok. Not sure why I was thinking that there was one. So the blocker I see left is including the license... do you think that will occur pretty soon? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 187317] Review Request: mindi
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mindi https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187317 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 20:47 EST --- As promised the latest version is now there: ftp://ftp.mondorescue.org/fedora/5/mindi-1.2.1-1.fc5.src.rpm Could I have a feedback on this one please ? I also have the mindi-busybox package to consider: ftp://ftp.mondorescue.org/fedora/5/mindi-busybox-1.2.2-1.fc5.src.rpm I tried to fix the problems reported in this report. Let me know what the staus could be. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 187318] Review Request: mondo
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mondo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187318 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 20:54 EST --- So a new version of mondo is available and I hope it will meet Fedora Extra requirements. ftp://ftp.mondorescue.org/fedora/5/mondo-2.2.1-1.fc5.src.rpm TIA for your feedback -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 219610] Review Request: uncrustify - code beautifier
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: uncrustify - code beautifier https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219610 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|UPSTREAM|NOTABUG --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 22:06 EST --- Hi Neal, I don't mean to be picky but packages that are successfully built and pushed: http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?uid=24978 should (please) be closed as NEXTRELEASE (not UPSTREAM). Thanks! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199405] Review Request: vtk - The Visualization Toolkit - A high level 3D visualization library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: vtk - The Visualization Toolkit - A high level 3D visualization library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199405 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 22:18 EST --- Hi Axel, thank you for your persistence and for the update! I'll be glad to review the next version (mentioned above) as soon as its ready. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 173388] Review Request: mod_evasive - Denial of Service evasion module for Apache
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mod_evasive - Denial of Service evasion module for Apache https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173388 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 22:27 EST --- There is a policy to deal with this sort of thing: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Policy/StalledReviews Consider this to indicate that the review is stalled and that a response is needed soon. If there is no response in 1 week, we will move this back to NEW and someone else can review it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 187243] Review Request: lazarus : IDE and RAD tool for the free pascal compiler (fpc)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lazarus : IDE and RAD tool for the free pascal compiler (fpc) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187243 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 23:19 EST --- More devel x86_64 build error fun: + cd lazarus + fpcmake Processing Makefile.fpc Error: Target linux, package rtl not found -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221309] Review Request: python-twisted-news - Twisted News is an NNTP server and programming library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-twisted-news - Twisted News is an NNTP server and programming library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221309 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 23:25 EST --- In an effort to get these subpackages all reviewed and pushed in, I would be happy to review this. Look for a full review in a bit here. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221308] Review Request: python-twisted-mail - A Twisted Mail library, server and client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-twisted-mail - A Twisted Mail library, server and client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221308 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 23:28 EST --- In an effort to get these subpackages all reviewed and pushed in, I would be happy to review this. Look for a full review in a bit here. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221308] Review Request: python-twisted-mail - A Twisted Mail library, server and client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-twisted-mail - A Twisted Mail library, server and client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221308 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 23:45 EST --- OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines OK - Spec file matches base package name. OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. OK - License (MIT) OK - License field in spec matches OK - License file included in package OK - Spec in American English OK - Spec is legible. OK - Sources match upstream sha1sum/md5sum: 56f65ebb7c35a6efcaf4983af7e015dfb7ab9eac TwistedMail-0.3.0.tar.bz2 56f65ebb7c35a6efcaf4983af7e015dfb7ab9eac TwistedMail-0.3.0.tar.bz2.1 33667938b399ee5513c59b5d4087294b TwistedMail-0.3.0.tar.bz2 33667938b399ee5513c59b5d4087294b TwistedMail-0.3.0.tar.bz2.1 OK - BuildRequires correct OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. OK - Package has a correct %clean section. OK - Package has correct buildroot OK - Package is code or permissible content. OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. OK - Package owns all the directories it creates. See below - No rpmlint output. OK - final provides and requires are sane: SHOULD Items: OK - Should build in mock. OK - Should build on all supported archs (i386/x86_64) OK - Should have dist tag OK - Should package latest version Issues: 1. rpmlint says: E: python-twisted-mail no-binary (which can be ignored. This package has to be arch since the entire twisted stack must be due to python-twisted core being so). I don't see any blockers here... this package is APPROVED. Don't forget to close this NEXTRELEASE once it's been imported and built. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221372] New: Review Request: rb_libtorrent - A C++ BitTorrent library aiming to be the best alternative
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221372 Summary: Review Request: rb_libtorrent - A C++ BitTorrent library aiming to be the best alternative Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://www.thecodergeek.com/downloads/fedora/rb_libtorrent.spec SRPM URL: http://www.thecodergeek.com/downloads/fedora/rb_libtorrent-0.11-1.src.rpm Description: This is a C++ library that aims to be a good alternative to all the other BitTorrent implementations around. It is a library and not a full featured client, although it comes with a working example client. Its main goals are to be very efficient (in terms of CPU and memory usage) as well as being very easy to use both as a user and developer. A quick comment on the naming: There is already a separate libtorrent package in Extras, but this is a different project entirely, and I must use a separate name from the one already in Extras. I looked into it a bit more deeply, and other distributions such as Gentoo and Arch us rb_libtorrent; hence I chose the same name to follow suit and keep consistent with them. This is being packaged as an indirect dependency for the Deluge BitTorrent client. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221372] Review Request: rb_libtorrent - A C++ BitTorrent library aiming to be the best alternative
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rb_libtorrent - A C++ BitTorrent library aiming to be the best alternative https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221372 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 23:50 EST --- [ Adding David to the CC list at his request. ] -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221309] Review Request: python-twisted-news - Twisted News is an NNTP server and programming library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-twisted-news - Twisted News is an NNTP server and programming library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221309 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-04 00:04 EST --- OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines OK - Spec file matches base package name. OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. OK - License (MIT) OK - License field in spec matches OK - License file included in package OK - Spec in American English OK - Spec is legible. OK - Sources match upstream md5sum: 62a93645867bacad4a4ca4d45e9ce090 TwistedNews-0.2.0.tar.bz2 62a93645867bacad4a4ca4d45e9ce090 TwistedNews-0.2.0.tar.bz2.1 b20aefb6002b6810361163b90f6d7a59ec9383ff TwistedNews-0.2.0.tar.bz2 b20aefb6002b6810361163b90f6d7a59ec9383ff TwistedNews-0.2.0.tar.bz2.1 OK - BuildRequires correct OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. OK - Package has a correct %clean section. OK - Package has correct buildroot OK - Package is code or permissible content. OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. OK - Package owns all the directories it creates. See below - No rpmlint output. OK - final provides and requires are sane: SHOULD Items: OK - Should build in mock. OK(i386/x86_64) - Should build on all supported archs OK - Should have dist tag OK - Should package latest version Issues: 1. rpmlint says: E: python-twisted-news no-binary Can be ignored in this case. I don't see any blockers here, so this package is APPROVED. Don't forget to close this request NEXTRELEASE once it's been imported and built. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221307] Review Request: python-twisted-lore - Twisted documentation system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-twisted-lore - Twisted documentation system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221307 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-04 00:21 EST --- OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines OK - Spec file matches base package name. OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. OK - License (MIT) OK - License field in spec matches OK - License file included in package OK - Spec in American English OK - Spec is legible. OK - Sources match upstream md5sum: 213569a86fc3d8558605e2847e6378b0 TwistedLore-0.2.0.tar.bz2 213569a86fc3d8558605e2847e6378b0 TwistedLore-0.2.0.tar.bz2.1 e4a7eb4132388a211eaa5b559b60f5916226 TwistedLore-0.2.0.tar.bz2 e4a7eb4132388a211eaa5b559b60f5916226 TwistedLore-0.2.0.tar.bz2.1 OK - BuildRequires correct OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. OK - Package has a correct %clean section. OK - Package has correct buildroot OK - Package is code or permissible content. OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. OK - Package owns all the directories it creates. See below - No rpmlint output. OK - final provides and requires are sane: SHOULD Items: OK - Should build in mock. OK - Should build on all supported archs OK - Should have dist tag OK - Should package latest version Issues: 1. rpmlint says: E: python-twisted-lore no-binary Can be ignored. I don't see any blockers here, so this package is APPROVED. Don't forget to close this review NEXTRELEASE once it's been imported and built. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221310] Review Request: python-twisted - Twisted is an event-based framework for internet applications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: python-twisted - Twisted is an event-based framework
for internet applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221310
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-04 00:34 EST ---
Not sure this needs a formal review, but I can do so if need be.
Questions/Issues:
1. What are these for? upstream/old packages?
Obsoletes: %{origname} = %{version}-%{release}
Provides: %{origname} = %{version}-%{release}
Obsoletes: twisted = %{version}-%{release}
Provides: twisted = %{version}-%{release}
2. Should both of those Obsoletes be just and not = ?
Surely you don't want to obsolete the very version you are providing?
3. Note that the old python-twisted package has:
Obsoletes: python-Twisted 1.3.0
Provides: python-Twisted = %{version}-%{release}
Should that be carried forward?
Can any Obsolete/Provides/Metapackage savvy folks look this over?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221376] New: Review Request: python-libtorrent - Python bindings to the rb_libtorrent library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221376 Summary: Review Request: python-libtorrent - Python bindings to the rb_libtorrent library Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://www.thecodergeek.com/downloads/fedora/python-libtorrent.spec SRPM URL: http://www.thecodergeek.com/downloads/fedora/python-libtorrent-0.3.0-1.src.rpm Description: This package contains Python bindings for the rb_libtorrent library, allowing one to write full-featured applications in Python that use rb_libtorrent. This is being packaged as a dependency of the Deluge BitTorrent client, and requires rb_libtorrent (in review, bug #221372) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221376] Review Request: python-libtorrent - Python bindings to the rb_libtorrent library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-libtorrent - Python bindings to the rb_libtorrent library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221376 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] BugsThisDependsOn||221372 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-04 00:48 EST --- [ Adding David to the CC list at his request; and blocking the rb_libtorrent review requst bug (since that is required as a build dependency). ] -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221372] Review Request: rb_libtorrent - A C++ BitTorrent library aiming to be the best alternative
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rb_libtorrent - A C++ BitTorrent library aiming to be the best alternative https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221372 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||221376 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
