[Bug 459065] Review Request: italc - intelligent teaching and learning with computers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459065 --- Comment #20 from Axel Thimm axel.th...@atrpms.net 2009-05-24 02:47:29 EDT --- It still is on the agenda, but I'm aging with it and someday either me or this review will die of age :( There are probably not that many educators or other people with needs that this package addresses. Having poured my pessimism into this report, you are welcome to review it! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487148] Review Request: gearmand - A distributed job system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487148
Terje Røsten terje...@phys.ntnu.no changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||terje...@phys.ntnu.no
--- Comment #9 from Terje Røsten terje...@phys.ntnu.no 2009-05-24 04:24:07
EDT ---
Hi guys, nice to see gearman in Fedora, however could you please take the time
to
test the package a little bit?
The are several bugs in the init script:
[ -z ${PIDFILE} ] pidfile = /var/run/gearmand/gearmand.pid
Two bugs here: the directory /var/run/gearmand is not created by the package
and syntax error: no space around the = sign.
More bugs:
gearmand=/usr/bin/gearmand
gearmand is install in /usr/sbin not /usr/bin
Might be a bug:
# config: /etc/sysconfig/gearmand
this file is not shipped in the package.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499336] Review Request: flickcurl - C library for the Flickr API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499336 --- Comment #5 from Rakesh Pandit rpan...@redhat.com 2009-05-24 05:16:31 EDT --- http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/spec/flickcurl.spec http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/srpm/flickcurl-1.10-2.fc10.src.rpm Fixed both issues. Thanks, -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487148] Review Request: gearmand - A distributed job system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487148 --- Comment #10 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2009-05-24 05:17:43 EDT --- Thanks for the feedback. I'll fix these issues ASAP. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499336] Review Request: flickcurl - C library for the Flickr API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499336 --- Comment #6 from Rakesh Pandit rpan...@redhat.com 2009-05-24 05:17:34 EDT --- http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/spec/flickcurl.spec http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/srpm/flickcurl-1.10-3.fc10.src.rpm Sorry for typo. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499336] Review Request: flickcurl - C library for the Flickr API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499336 Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #7 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2009-05-24 05:22:36 EDT --- Ok, this package is APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 474787] Review Requrest: stxxl - C++ STL drop-in replacement for extremely large datasets
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474787
--- Comment #9 from D Haley my...@yahoo.com 2009-05-24 05:21:02 EDT ---
SPEC URL: http://dhd.selfip.com/427e/stxxl-4.spec
SRPM URL: http://dhd.selfip.com/427e/stxxl-1.2.1-4.fc10.src.rpm
* Regarding %install section - you may shorten it a bit by replacing
Done.
The %build section still doesn't honour %optflags. You should fix your spec
in the following way:
I added optflags, but the macro doesn't (on my system) contain -fPIC, therefore
removing PIC causes errors when running rpmlint hence I now have
echo OPT=%{optflags} -fPIC make.settings.local
In any case, duplicate -fPICs are not going to cause any harm when seen by GCC.
You also don't need to explicitly install doc-files. Just enumerate them in
%files section properly.
Doc section updated.
Consider adding README and TROUBLESHOOTING to %doc.
Done.
* Sun May 24 2009 mycae(a!t)yahoo.com 1.2.1-4
- Used doc macro to install docs previously manually installed
- Added README and TROUBLESHOOTING to docs
- Added otpflags macro to build settings
- Use install program rather than cp for the install of lib
RPM Lint:
$ rpmlint -vi stxxl.spec ../SRPMS/stxxl-1.2.1-4.fc10.src.rpm
../RPMS/i386/stxxl-1.2.1-4.fc10.i386.rpm
stxxl.src: I: checking
stxxl.i386: I: checking
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481738] Review Request: python-EnthoughtBase - Core package for the Enthought Tool Suite
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481738 --- Comment #10 from Rakesh Pandit rpan...@redhat.com 2009-05-24 05:34:00 EDT --- ping ? :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499336] Review Request: flickcurl - C library for the Flickr API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499336 Rakesh Pandit rpan...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Rakesh Pandit rpan...@redhat.com 2009-05-24 05:31:32 EDT --- Thanks! New Package CVS Request === Package Name: flickcurl Short Description: C library for the Flickr API Owners: rakesh Branches: F-9 F-10 F-11 InitialCC: Cvsextras Commits: yes -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481727] Review Request: python-EnvisageCore - Extensible Application Framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481727 --- Comment #7 from Rakesh Pandit rpan...@redhat.com 2009-05-24 05:35:47 EDT --- ping :) ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481759] Review Request: python-Apptools - Enthough Tool Suite Application Tools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481759 --- Comment #16 from Rakesh Pandit rpan...@redhat.com 2009-05-24 05:34:16 EDT --- ping ?:) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499993] Review Request: dvtm - Tiling window management for the console
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=43 --- Comment #6 from Rakesh Pandit rpan...@redhat.com 2009-05-24 05:34:39 EDT --- ping ?:) Thanks for review, bit impatient! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481727] Review Request: python-EnvisageCore - Extensible Application Framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481727 --- Comment #8 from Rakesh Pandit rpan...@redhat.com 2009-05-24 05:36:44 EDT --- I have anyway confirmed with upstream ... that tests need lot of work and they have wrong dependency over other package in stack .. which otherwise make no sense. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481759] Review Request: python-Apptools - Enthough Tool Suite Application Tools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481759 --- Comment #17 from Rakesh Pandit rpan...@redhat.com 2009-05-24 05:42:38 EDT --- Actually .. it has been long time for Mayavi stack in review it is very import for Educational purposes for Engg Mechanical guys. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481701] Review Request: python-TraitsGUI - Traits-capable windowing framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481701 Rakesh Pandit rpan...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|oget.fed...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481701] Review Request: python-TraitsGUI - Traits-capable windowing framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481701
--- Comment #7 from Rakesh Pandit rpan...@redhat.com 2009-05-24 05:45:07 EDT
---
ping ?:)
! The md5sum you put in the specfile is wrong. But you don't need to put an
md5sum there anyway.
Fixed.
* Each package must consistently use macros: %{__python} needs to be converted
to python
Fixed.
* The new guidelines prefer usage of %global over %define. See:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Python#System_Architecture
Fixed.
? Is there a way of generating/packaging the API docs? How about the docs
directory?
I don't see an easy way.
? How about the examples directory?
Fixed.
http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/spec/python-TraitsGUI.spec
http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/srpm/python-TraitsGUI-3.0.4-2.fc10.src.rpm
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 479951] Review Request: iniparser - a library for parsing ini-style files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479951 Alex Hudson (Fedora Address) fed...@alexhudson.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #15 from Alex Hudson (Fedora Address) fed...@alexhudson.com 2009-05-24 07:12:48 EDT --- Imported and built, thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502352] New: Review Request: php-markdown - Markdown implementation in PHP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: php-markdown - Markdown implementation in PHP https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502352 Summary: Review Request: php-markdown - Markdown implementation in PHP Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: rpan...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- SPEC: http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/spec/php-markdown.spec SRPM: http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/srpm/php-markdown-1.0.1m-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: This is a PHP implementation of John Gruber's Markdown. This is a Python implementation of John Gruber's Markdown. It is almost completely compliant with the reference implementation. It is required for laconica. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481507] Review Request: clanship - Battleship clone
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481507 --- Comment #12 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2009-05-24 08:38:40 EDT --- (In reply to comment #11) There are kbattleship in kdegames, should that be renamed too? Yes, please open a separate bug against kdegames. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499986] Review Request: mingw32-libidn - MinGW Windows Internationalized Domain Name support library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499986 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-05-24 08:44:08 EDT --- mingw32-libidn-1.14-2.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mingw32-libidn-1.14-2.fc11 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502358] New: Review Request: mojomojo - Catalyst DBIx::Class powered Wiki
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: mojomojo - Catalyst DBIx::Class powered Wiki Alias: mojomojo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502358 Summary: Review Request: mojomojo - Catalyst DBIx::Class powered Wiki Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/MojoMojo/ OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: iarn...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~iarnell/review/mojomojo.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~iarnell/review/mojomojo-0.999029-1.fc12.src.rpm Description: Mojomojo is a sort of content managment system, borrowing many concepts from wikis and blogs. It allows you to maintain a full tree-structure of pages, and to interlink them in various ways. It has full version support, so you can always go back to a previous version and see what's changed with an easy AJAX- based diff system. There are also a bunch of other features like bult-in fulltext search, live AJAX preview of editing, and RSS feeds for every wiki page. *rt-0.09 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499986] Review Request: mingw32-libidn - MinGW Windows Internationalized Domain Name support library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499986 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-05-24 08:55:55 EDT --- mingw32-libidn-1.14-2.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mingw32-libidn-1.14-2.fc10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499991] Review Request: mingw32-libxslt - MinGW Windows Library providing the Gnome XSLT engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=41 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-05-24 08:57:25 EDT --- mingw32-libxslt-1.1.24-7.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mingw32-libxslt-1.1.24-7.fc11 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499983] Review Request: mingw32-libsoup - MinGW library for HTTP and XML-RPC functionality
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499983 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-05-24 08:56:34 EDT --- mingw32-libsoup-2.26.1-2.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mingw32-libsoup-2.26.1-2.fc11 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499979] Review Request: mingw32-libssh2 - MinGW Windows library implementation of the SSH2 protocol
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499979 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-05-24 08:54:59 EDT --- mingw32-libssh2-1.1-2.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mingw32-libssh2-1.1-2.fc11 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481507] Review Request: clanship - Battleship clone
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481507 --- Comment #13 from Alexey Torkhov atork...@gmail.com 2009-05-24 08:56:34 EDT --- (In reply to comment #12) Yes, please open a separate bug against kdegames. Done: bug 502359. My suggestion is to use name like ‘Sea fight’ or ‘Natal battle’ as replacement for this game too. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499979] Review Request: mingw32-libssh2 - MinGW Windows library implementation of the SSH2 protocol
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499979 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-05-24 09:00:43 EDT --- mingw32-libssh2-1.1-2.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mingw32-libssh2-1.1-2.fc10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502358] Review Request: mojomojo - Catalyst DBIx::Class powered Wiki
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502358 --- Comment #1 from Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com 2009-05-24 09:04:28 EDT --- No koji build at the minute due to bug #473551 (rrdtool dejavu font dependency problems again), but the noarch rpms are available too from the same location. And there is probably enough in the spec alone to raise a few issues (I've tried to package this as a complete out-of-the-box web application - so much more than a normal perl package). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499991] Review Request: mingw32-libxslt - MinGW Windows Library providing the Gnome XSLT engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=41 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-05-24 09:08:54 EDT --- mingw32-libxslt-1.1.24-7.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mingw32-libxslt-1.1.24-7.fc10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502358] Review Request: mojomojo - Catalyst DBIx::Class powered Wiki
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502358 --- Comment #2 from Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com 2009-05-24 09:10:31 EDT --- Oh, and unfortunately, it doesn't quite run straight out of the box due to bug #502273 - needs a chmod 755 /var/run/httpd (or chgrp apache and chmod 750 if you prefer). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457160] Review Request: Zorba - General purpose XQuery processor implemented in C++
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457160 David Timms dti...@iinet.net.au changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(ti...@math.uh.edu | |) | --- Comment #30 from David Timms dti...@iinet.net.au 2009-05-24 09:20:17 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=345244) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=345244) rpmbuild failure on F11- (rawhide) (In reply to comment #29) New upload SRPM: ftp://zorba-xquery.com/zorba-0.9.5-6.fc10.src.rpm SPEC: ftp://zorba-xquery.com/zorba.spec I see that cmake-2.6.4-1 is now in updates for Fedora 10. This version fixes the bug discussed in the previous comments. So I fixed the zorba.spec file to require this version and things build fine for me on Fedora 10. No go on F11- see attached end of compile. I had gcc 4.4 installed in /usr/local on my development machine and the sources required a few patches to compile with that version. So I've included them with this update. These patches do not break the build with older versions of gcc. I've triggered a test build on koji: (f10-updates) http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1374263 ps. package versions. The upstream seems to have gone: ls -1 zorba.spec-0.9.21-2 zorba.spec-0.9.21-3 zorba.spec-0.9.4-2 zorba.spec-0.9.5-2 zorba.spec-0.9.5-6 $ rpmdev-vercmp 0 0.9.21 2 0 0.9.4 2 0:0.9.21-2 is newer You would have to be careful with those, I think to ensure that 0.9.4 was packaged as 0.9.21-4.4 or something (to avoid epochs). Alternately it might have been better knowing what we know now to package 0.9.21-1 as 0.9.2-3.21 and 0.9.21-2 as 0.9.2-4.21 and 0.9.21-3 as 0.9.2-5.21. or 0.9.21-1 as 0.9.2.1-3.21 and so forth. Otherwise rpm upgrade paths wont work. More on https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#NonNumericRelease -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497441] Review Request: mumble - Voice chat application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497441 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #82 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-05-24 09:22:39 EDT --- Closing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 500926] Review Request: me-tv - GNOME desktop application for watching digital television
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500926 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #31 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-05-24 09:23:51 EDT --- Now closing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502352] Review Request: php-markdown - Markdown implementation in PHP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502352 Gianluca Sforna gia...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||gia...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502352] Review Request: php-markdown - Markdown implementation in PHP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502352 Gianluca Sforna gia...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|gia...@gmail.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502352] Review Request: php-markdown - Markdown implementation in PHP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502352 --- Comment #1 from Gianluca Sforna gia...@gmail.com 2009-05-24 11:06:49 EDT --- Few items to check: * rpmlint is not clean: rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-10-x86_64/result/php-markdown-1.0.1m-1.fc10.src.rpm php-markdown.src:20: W: setup-not-quiet php-markdown.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 12, tab: line 1) 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. add -q to the %setup line and file the tab/space issue * php and unzip are not needed to build, php can stay as a Require: tough * you may consider using the install command instead of mkdir+cp the last one is not a must. Fix the first two items and I think I can approve the package -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 493246] Review Request: Shutter -- a feature-rich screenshot program.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=493246 Liang Suilong liangsuil...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(liangsuil...@gmai | |l.com) | --- Comment #8 from Liang Suilong liangsuil...@gmail.com 2009-05-24 11:24:47 EDT --- Jan Klepek， Yes, I am still here. But you know Shutter depends on perl-Goo-Canvas and perl-Gnome2-Wnck. So I want to finish the submitting process of these two package. Now the process will be end soon. Later I will get into this process again. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 493247] Review Request: perl-Gnome2-Wnck -- Perl interface to the Window Navigator Construction Kit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=493247 Liang Suilong liangsuil...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ke...@tummy.com, ||liangsuil...@gmail.com --- Comment #13 from Liang Suilong liangsuil...@gmail.com 2009-05-24 11:35:25 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-Gnome2-Wnck Short Description: Perl interface to the Window Navigator Construction Kit Owners: liangsuilong Branches: F-10 F-11 devel InitialCC: liangsuilong Cvsextras Commits: yes -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 493250] Review Request: perl-Goo-Canvas -- Goo::Canvas Perl interface to the GooCanvas
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=493250 --- Comment #21 from Liang Suilong liangsuil...@gmail.com 2009-05-24 12:29:51 EDT --- (In reply to comment #20) - and changing tetris word on script name and in documents (mentioned in spot's comment 5) Is your mean that I should rename perltetris.pl as tetris.pl? I do not think it is needed, Because if it runs well, we will not need to change anything. Also I think that we just need to add what we change into Changelog is OK.. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502387] New: Review Request: mingw32-hunspell - MinGW Windows spell checker and morphological analyzer library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: mingw32-hunspell - MinGW Windows spell checker and morphological analyzer library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502387 Summary: Review Request: mingw32-hunspell - MinGW Windows spell checker and morphological analyzer library Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: erik-fed...@vanpienbroek.nl QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com, fedora-mi...@lists.fedoraproject.org Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://www.ftd4linux.nl/contrib/mingw32-hunspell.spec SRPM URL: http://www.ftd4linux.nl/contrib/mingw32-hunspell-1.2.8-6.fc11.src.rpm Description: Hunspell is a spell checker and morphological analyzer library and program designed for languages with rich morphology and complex word compounding or character encoding. Hunspell interfaces: Ispell-like terminal interface using Curses library, Ispell pipe interface, OpenOffice.org UNO module. This is the MinGW build of hunspell Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1374924 Approved MinGW packaging guidelines are here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/MinGW -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499992] Review Request: mingw32-webkitgtk - MinGW Windows web content engine library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=42 Erik van Pienbroek erik-fed...@vanpienbroek.nl changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||502388 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502388] New: Review Request: mingw32-enchant - MinGW Windows Enchanting Spell Checking Library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: mingw32-enchant - MinGW Windows Enchanting Spell Checking Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502388 Summary: Review Request: mingw32-enchant - MinGW Windows Enchanting Spell Checking Library Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: erik-fed...@vanpienbroek.nl QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com, fedora-mi...@lists.fedoraproject.org Depends on: 502387 Blocks: 42 Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://www.ftd4linux.nl/contrib/mingw32-enchant.spec SRPM URL: http://www.ftd4linux.nl/contrib/mingw32-enchant-1.4.2-6.fc11.src.rpm Description: A library that wraps other spell checking backends. This is the MinGW build of enchant Koji scratch build: none yet because mingw32-hunspell isn't in Fedora yet Approved MinGW packaging guidelines are here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/MinGW -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502387] Review Request: mingw32-hunspell - MinGW Windows spell checker and morphological analyzer library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502387 Erik van Pienbroek erik-fed...@vanpienbroek.nl changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||502388 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478919] Review Request: globus-xio-gsi-driver - Globus Toolkit - Globus XIO GSI Driver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478919 Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||oget.fed...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|oget.fed...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com 2009-05-24 12:39:15 EDT --- My notes for this one (everything seems fine): - Koji rawhide build is fine http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1374872 - rpmlint globus-xio-gsi-driver-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation can be ignored - The package contains libtool archives, but as documented, these are needed during runtime. ? sed -e 's!gssapi_error!globus_!' -i pkgdata/pkg_data_src.gpt.in Did upstream adapt to this namespace change? It looks like all the depending parts (to globus-gssapi-error) need to be modified. This package (globus-xio-gsi-driver) is APPROVED by oget -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 493250] Review Request: perl-Goo-Canvas -- Goo::Canvas Perl interface to the GooCanvas
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=493250 --- Comment #22 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-05-24 12:39:53 EDT --- (In reply to comment #21) (In reply to comment #20) - and changing tetris word on script name and in documents (mentioned in spot's comment 5) Is your mean that I should rename perltetris.pl as tetris.pl? I do not think it is needed, Because if it runs well, we will not need to change anything. This is not related to whether this program works well or not, but to legal issue (see spot's comment 5) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 468229] Review Request: python-wsgiref - WSGI (PEP 333) Reference Library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468229 Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review?, |fedora-review+ |needinfo?(sergio.pa...@gmai | |l.com) | --- Comment #7 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com 2009-05-24 13:05:55 EDT --- + source files match upstream: + package meets naming and versioning guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license field matches the actual license. + license is open source-compatible. + latest version is being packaged. + BuildRequires are proper. + compiler flags are appropriate. + %clean is present. + package installs properly + rpmlint is silent. + no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. + owns the directories it creates. + doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + no scriptlets present. + code, not content. + documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. + %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. + no headers. + no pkgconfig files. + no libtool .la droppings. If you plan to build this package in EL-4, please reread the python guidelines. Before EL-5 you have to write the python-abi dependency explicitly. Furthermore, .pyo files have to be created by hand. Package is APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 501134] Review Request: rubygem-mongrel_cluster - GemPlugin wrapper for the mongrel HTTP server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501134
Andreas Osowski th0...@mkdir.name changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||th0...@mkdir.name
--- Comment #1 from Andreas Osowski th0...@mkdir.name 2009-05-24 13:11:05
EDT ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[!] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
Tested on:
[x] F10/i386
[!] Rpmlint output:
Source RPM:
[make...@hattan rubygem-mongrel_cluster]$ rpmlint
rubygem-mongrel_cluster-1.0.5-1.fc10.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
Binary RPM(s):
[make...@hattan rubygem-mongrel_cluster]$ rpmlint
rubygem-mongrel_cluster-1.0.5-1.fc10.noarch.rpm
rubygem-mongrel_cluster.noarch: W: no-reload-entry
/etc/rc.d/init.d/mongrel_cluster
rubygem-mongrel_cluster.noarch: E: subsys-not-used
/etc/rc.d/init.d/mongrel_cluster
rubygem-mongrel_cluster.noarch: W: incoherent-init-script-name mongrel_cluster
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings.
[x] Package is not relocatable.
[x] Buildroot is correct
%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: GPLv2 or Ruby
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
SHA1SUM of package: 7ff77538842c97b363137c471903f7e3
[x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[-] The spec file handles locales properly.
[-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}.
[x] Package consistently uses macros.
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[x] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
[-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on: F10/i386
[-] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
Tested on: -
[x] Package functions as described.
[x] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files is correct.
[-] File based requires are sane.
Remaining issues:
Fix the init script issues, we can ignore the incoherent-init-script-name, but
the other two should be fixed
Each Ruby package must indicate the Ruby ABI version it depends on with a line
like
Requires: ruby(abi) = 1.8
Install docs to /usr/share/doc/package name-version/ rather than the
respective rubygems path
According to the Homepage, mongrel_cluster = 0.2.0 is required. I take it that
this mongrel_cluster is this package? Otherwise, railsmachine (the project
linked to when clicking on mongrel_cluster) has not yet been packaged.
--
Configure bugmail:
[Bug 501134] Review Request: rubygem-mongrel_cluster - GemPlugin wrapper for the mongrel HTTP server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501134 Andreas Osowski th0...@mkdir.name changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|th0...@mkdir.name -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 501134] Review Request: rubygem-mongrel_cluster - GemPlugin wrapper for the mongrel HTTP server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501134 --- Comment #2 from Robert Scheck redhat-bugzi...@linuxnetz.de 2009-05-24 13:22:56 EDT --- I can't see a pointer in https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Ruby for using %doc rather rubygems path for documentation. Upstream is a bit confusing, you don't need railsmachine, mongrel_cluster as it is packaged here, works and has all the features already. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484644] Review Request: screenlets - Fully themeable mini-apps
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484644 Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||sergio.pa...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|sergio.pa...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 501134] Review Request: rubygem-mongrel_cluster - GemPlugin wrapper for the mongrel HTTP server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501134 --- Comment #3 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-05-24 13:30:47 EDT --- Well, we usually leaves documents installed under %geminstdir as they are and does not move them to %_defaultdocdir. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502227] Review Request: virtuoso-opensource - A high-performance object-relational SQL database
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502227 --- Comment #1 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-05-24 13:33:07 EDT --- URL is obsolete, should be http://virtuoso.openlinksw.com/dataspace/dav/wiki/Main/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499992] Review Request: mingw32-webkitgtk - MinGW Windows web content engine library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=42 --- Comment #5 from Erik van Pienbroek erik-fed...@vanpienbroek.nl 2009-05-24 13:58:39 EDT --- The libraries enchant and hunspell (dependency for enchant) are now packaged and ready for review (bug 502388 and bug 502387). Spec URL: http://www.ftd4linux.nl/contrib/mingw32-webkitgtk.spec SRPM URL: http://www.ftd4linux.nl/contrib/mingw32-webkitgtk-1.1.7-1.fc11.src.rpm * Fri May 22 2009 Erik van Pienbroek epien...@fedoraproject.org - 1.1.7-1 - Update to 1.1.7 * Sun May 10 2009 Erik van Pienbroek epien...@fedoraproject.org - 1.1.6-1 - Update to 1.1.6 - Updated the patches to apply cleanly against version 1.1.6 - Renamed the package to mingw32-webkitgtk - Merged the changes from the native webkitgtk package up to 1.1.6-1 - Added a BR: mingw32-enchant (required as of version 1.1.6) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483434] Review Request: argtable2 - A library for parsing GNU style command line arguments
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483434 --- Comment #13 from Jess Portnoy kerne...@gmail.com 2009-05-24 13:59:59 EDT --- Hello, All changes were applied as suggested. The new src.rpm can be downloaded from: http://downloads.sourceforge.net/argtable/argtable2-11-2.fc11.src.rpm I'm actually pretty fond of using macros but if you see a good reason not to, I'm willing to modify the spec file accordingly. Thanks, -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 501134] Review Request: rubygem-mongrel_cluster - GemPlugin wrapper for the mongrel HTTP server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501134 --- Comment #4 from Andreas Osowski th0...@mkdir.name 2009-05-24 14:13:41 EDT --- Oh, okay. I was unsure about that as rubygem-sqlite3-ruby had them installed in %_defaultdocdir (installed there by default anyway) Thanks for clearing that up, it was not listed on the wiki page -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502352] Review Request: php-markdown - Markdown implementation in PHP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502352 --- Comment #2 from Rakesh Pandit rpan...@redhat.com 2009-05-24 14:32:00 EDT --- SPEC: http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/spec/php-markdown.spec SRPM: http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/srpm/php-markdown-1.0.1m-2.fc10.src.rpm Fixed both -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502227] Review Request: virtuoso-opensource - A high-performance object-relational SQL database
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502227 --- Comment #2 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu 2009-05-24 14:40:09 EDT --- meh, it's a redirect to a wiki (which I'd venture could very well change). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483434] Review Request: argtable2 - A library for parsing GNU style command line arguments
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483434 --- Comment #14 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-05-24 14:47:26 EDT --- (In reply to comment #13) Hello, All changes were applied as suggested. The new src.rpm can be downloaded from: http://downloads.sourceforge.net/argtable/argtable2-11-2.fc11.src.rpm What about the spec file? I'd suggest using something else than the project home page, as the review process may take many steps before everything is in order. I'm actually pretty fond of using macros but if you see a good reason not to, I'm willing to modify the spec file accordingly. Well, it's not an official guideline; I just think it isn't good style as nothing is gained from using the macros: KISS! Do you still need a sponsor? I can sponsor you, if you show me you know the Fedora Packaging guidelines. Thus you need to do a couple of informal reviews (as Christian did on this package), and make at least one another package submission. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 501251] Review Request: perl-Tk-Stderr - Capture standard error output, display in separate window for Perl::Tk
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501251 Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de 2009-05-24 15:14:31 EDT --- Ok, the package could build on koji, so I can APPROVE it. But it may be nice, if you can clarify the license state with the upstream. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 501353] Review Request: ascii - Interactive ASCII name and synonym chart
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501353 --- Comment #13 from Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de 2009-05-24 15:27:11 EDT --- Please wrtie $RPM_BUILD_ROOT or $(RPM_BUILD_ROOT) instead of $RPM_BUILD_ROOT Please create a proper Buildroot defintion https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag The build step in your package doesn't use the compiler flags defined in $RPM_OPT_FLAGS. the Debuginfo package doesn't contains the source files of your package. This may be happen because the build step doesn't use the compiler flags defined in $RPM_OPT_FLAGS Good: + Rpmlint is silent on source rpm + Rpmlint is silent on binary rpm + rpmlint is silent on debuginfo rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 501228] Review Request: mod_selinux - An apache module to launch web applications with restrictive privileges
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501228 Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de 2009-05-24 15:42:33 EDT --- Good: + Could download package via spectool -g + Packaged sources matches with upstream (md5sum: aadee8b6e5c7d99a6ff0a66fca8032dd) + Scratch build on koni works fine. + No complaints from rpmlint for source rpm + No complaints from rpmlint for binary rpm + No complaints from rpmlint for debuginfo rpm + Debuginfo package contains sources I will APPROVE this package, but keep in mind to request only branches for devel and F-11. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502352] Review Request: php-markdown - Markdown implementation in PHP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502352 Gianluca Sforna gia...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Gianluca Sforna gia...@gmail.com 2009-05-24 16:02:51 EDT --- Review: * package name follows naming guidelines * License (BSD) is good and matches actual one * License text is present and correctly packaged * sources matches upstream ( MD5 0111093efcb81e455e7bbd959d4cff54 ) * rpmlint is silent * build fine in mock for F10 APPROVED just a couple of final remarks. Since you included the non numeric part in the version field, please pay attention to future upgrades and use rpmdev-vercmp to check if the upgrade path is correct. There are worpress refernces in the code. I don't know if this is included/used by default in WP, but if this is the case the WP maintainer should be requiring this package instead. It would be nice if you discuss with him about the issue -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 467655] Review Request: yafaray - a raytracer for Blender.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467655 --- Comment #39 from Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de 2009-05-24 16:52:40 EDT --- (In reply to comment #38) The symbolic links are being created in ~/.blender/scripts just fine. I have deleted them many times and they are always automatically recreated. For instance: lrwxrwxrwx 1 roma40 2009-05-23 21:14 yafaray_ui.py - /usr/share/blender/scripts/yafaray_ui.py lrwxrwxrwx 1 roma40 2009-05-23 21:14 yaf_export.py - /usr/share/blender/scripts/yaf_export.py The plugins seems to have been installed in the appropriate locations, according to Jochen Schmitt, suggestions. The .so and the plugins were once in the same directories, but I was asked to move them. What exactly are you concerns? I assume, that you ask why I create the symlinks in `/.blender/scripts? the answer is, that blender only recorgnise the script and plugins which are available on this place. Best Regards: Jochen Schmitt -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 467655] Review Request: yafaray - a raytracer for Blender.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467655 --- Comment #40 from Paulo Roma Cavalcanti pro...@gmail.com 2009-05-24 17:09:17 EDT --- I assume, that you ask why I create the symlinks in `/.blender/scripts? No. I know that. the answer is, that blender only recorgnise the script and plugins which are available on this place. This part is just fine. The problem, as I understand, are the shared libraries x python scripts: /usr/lib64/libyafarayplugin.so /usr/lib64/libyafarayqt.so /usr/lib64/python2.5/site-packages/_yafqt.so /usr/lib64/python2.5/site-packages/_yafrayinterface.so /usr/share/blender/scripts/yaf_export.py /usr/share/blender/scripts/yaf_light.py /usr/share/blender/scripts/yaf_material.py /usr/share/blender/scripts/yaf_object.py /usr/share/blender/scripts/yaf_texture.py /usr/share/blender/scripts/yafaray_ui.py /usr/share/blender/scripts/yafqt.py The shared libraries are architecture dependent, but the scripts are not (but they reference the libraries). Therefore, they can be in the same directory (as they were in previous versions), or in separate directories as they are now. The package seems to be working just fine the way it is now, and I am going to make them available soon in Yafaray forum, so people can test them. If there is a Fedora guideline for this situation, please let me know. Thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497948] Review Request: mulk - Non-interactive multi-connection network downloader with image filtering and Metalink support.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497948 --- Comment #5 from Ant Bryan anthonybr...@gmail.com 2009-05-24 17:31:35 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) (In reply to comment #3) Okay, after adding libjpeg-devel builds. This is fixed upstream. Thanks for pointing it out! This is included in new upstream release, 0.4.1 However, the package uses its own versions of libmetalink and uri, which is not allowed. You have already packaged libmetalink; there isn't a package of uri yet. You need to make one and patch this package to use the packaged versions of libmetalink and uri. https://gna.org/projects/uri/ I found out that uri has not been maintained for 8 years, but a similar library called uriparser is actively developed. The current plan upstream is to switch to uriparser ( http://uriparser.sourceforge.net/ ) which is already packaged for Fedora other distributions. Upstream has switched from uri to uriparser. The package no longer uses its own version of libmetalink. * Sun May 24 2009 Ant Bryan anthonybryan at gmail.com - 0.4.1-1 - Upstream release 0.4.1, change from liburi to uriparser - Add BuildRequires: uriparser-devel - Remove BuildRequires: libjpeg-devel Spec URL: http://pastebin.ca/1433317 SRPM URL: http://www.metalinker.org/mirrors/mulk/mulk-0.4.1-1.fc10.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 498248] Review Request: viewmol - An open source graphical front end for computational chemistry programs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=498248
--- Comment #6 from Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de 2009-05-24
17:30:22 EDT ---
REVIEW for viewmol-2.4.1-2.fc10.src.rpm
FIX - MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted
in the review.
rpmlint Downloads/viewmol-2.4.1-2.fc12.i586.rpm
viewmol.i586: E: script-without-shebang /usr/lib/viewmol/readdmol.awk
viewmol.i586: W: dangerous-command-in-%post mv
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings.
OK - MUST: The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
OK - MUST: The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
OK - MUST: The package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
OK - MUST: The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
Licensing Guidelines: GPLv2+
OK - MUST: The License field in the package spec file matches the actual
license.
OK - MUST: The license file from the source package is included in %doc.
OK - MUST: The spec file is in American English.
OK - MUST: The spec file for the package is legible.
OK - MUST: The sources used to build the package match the upstream source by
MD5 c88cc5641bffc14d749e9759a1c813ac
OK - MUST: The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on
i386
N/A - MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch.
OK - MUST: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
N/A - MUST: The spec file handles locales properly with the %find_lang macro.
N/A - MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared
library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths,
must call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
N/A - MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must
state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package.
OK - MUST: The package owns all directories that it creates.
OK - MUST: The package does not contain any duplicate files in the %files
listing.
OK - MUST: Permissions on files are set properly. Every %files section includes
a %defattr(...) line.
OK - MUST: The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot}.
OK - MUST: The package consistently uses macros, as described in the macros
section of Packaging Guidelines.
OK - MUST: The package contains code, or permissable content.
??? - MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -doc subpackage.
OK - MUST: Files included as %doc do not affect the runtime of the application.
N/A - MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
N/A - MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
N/A - MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires:
pkgconfig'.
N/A - MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in
a -devel package.
n/A - MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release}
OK - MUST: The package does not contain any .la libtool archives.
OK - MUST: The package contains a GUI application and includes a
%{name}.desktop file, and that file is properly installed with
desktop-file-install in the %install section.
OK - MUST: The packages does not own files or directories already owned by
other packages.
OK - MUST: At the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf %{buildroot}.
OK - MUST: All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8.
SHOULD Items:
N/A - SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
N/A - SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file
should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
OK - SHOULD: The the package builds in mock.
OK - SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all
supported architectures.
OK - SHOULD: The package functions as described.
FIX - SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. This is
vague, and left up to the reviewers judgement to determine sanity.
N/A - SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency.
N/A - SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends on their usecase,
and this is usually for development purposes, so should be placed in a -devel
pkg.
N/A - SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin,
/sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the
file instead of the file itself.
OK - optflags honored
OK - timestamps preserved
Issues:
- the mime scriptlet is not sane. There is no way to uninstall
[Bug 498246] Review Request: towhee - A Monte Carlo molecular simulation code
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=498246
Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #6 from Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de 2009-05-24
18:05:16 EDT ---
Sorry it took so long.
(In reply to comment #2)
No, it is quite standard to ship executable scripts in %doc, as the program
works without them; they're just examples of use.
You can ship scripts in %doc if they are not executable, so no problem here.
But IMO you should consider packaging the Examples separately, it's 9 MB one
the disk and as you said people don't necessarily need the files.
REVIEW FOR towhee-6.2.2-3.fc10.src.rpm
OK - MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in
the review.
$ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-i386/result/towhee-*
5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
OK - MUST: The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
OK - MUST: The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
OK - MUST: The package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
OK - MUST: The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
Licensing Guidelines: GPLv2+
OK - MUST: The License field in the package spec file matches the actual
license.
OK - MUST: The license file from the source package is included in %doc.
OK - MUST: The spec file is in American English.
OK - MUST: The spec file for the package is legible.
OK - MUST: The sources used to build the package match the upstream source by
MD5 f911980711593a07b6e80e147eb03339
OK - MUST: The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on
i386
N/A - MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch.
OK - MUST: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
N/A - MUST: The spec file handles locales properly with the %find_lang macro.
N/A - MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared
library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths,
must call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
N/A - MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must
state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package.
OK - MUST: The package owns all directories that it creates.
OK - MUST: The package does not contain any duplicate files in the %files
listing.
OK - MUST: Permissions on files are set properly. Every %files section includes
a %defattr(...) line.
OK - MUST: The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot}.
OK - MUST: The package consistently uses macros, as described in the macros
section of Packaging Guidelines.
OK - MUST: The package contains code, or permissable content.
FIX? - MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -doc subpackage.
OK - MUST: Files included as %doc do not affect the runtime of the application.
N/A - MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
N/A - MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
N/A - MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires:
pkgconfig'.
N/A - MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in
a -devel package.
N/A - MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release}
OK - MUST: The package does not contain any .la libtool archives.
N/A - MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the
%install section.
OK - MUST: The package does not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
OK - MUST: At the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf %{buildroot}.
OK - MUST: All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8.
SHOULD Items:
N/A - SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
N/A - SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file
should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
OK - SHOULD: The the package builds in mock.
OK - SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all
supported architectures.
OK - SHOULD: The package functions as described.
N/A - SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane.
OK - SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency.
[Bug 502404] New: Review Request: lxsession - Lightweight X11 session manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: lxsession - Lightweight X11 session manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502404 Summary: Review Request: lxsession - Lightweight X11 session manager Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: fed...@christoph-wickert.de QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://cwickert.fedorapeople.org/review/lxsession.spec SRPM URL: http://cwickert.fedorapeople.org/review/lxsession-0.3.8-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: LXSession is a standard-compliant X11 session manager with shutdown/ reboot/suspend support via HAL. In connection with gdm it also supports user switching. LXSession is derived from XSM and is developed as default X11 session manager of LXDE, the Lightweight X11 Desktop Environment. Though being part of LXDE, it's totally desktop-independent and only has few dependencies. Note: This is a re-review because the package was renamed upstream from lxsession-lite, see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477719 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502054] Review Request: perl-Lingua-Flags - Provide small flag icons
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502054 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|cw...@alumni.drew.edu -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502054] Review Request: perl-Lingua-Flags - Provide small flag icons
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502054 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502054] Review Request: perl-Lingua-Flags - Provide small flag icons
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502054 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502054] Review Request: perl-Lingua-Flags - Provide small flag icons
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502054 --- Comment #2 from Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 2009-05-24 18:58:12 EDT --- Looks good. koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1368784 Spec looks sane, clean and consistent; license is correct (GPL+ or Artistic); make test passes cleanly. Source tarballs match upstream (sha1sum): c2a7512bc98f7c67d014b4646af79e95afa55bdf Lingua-Flags-0.05.tar.gz c2a7512bc98f7c67d014b4646af79e95afa55bdf Lingua-Flags-0.05.tar.gz.srpm Final provides / requires are sane: 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. = perl-Lingua-Flags-0.05-1.fc12.noarch.rpm = rpmlint 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. provides for perl-Lingua-Flags-0.05-1.fc12.noarch.rpm perl(Lingua::Flags) = 0.05 perl-Lingua-Flags = 0.05-1.fc12 requires for perl-Lingua-Flags-0.05-1.fc12.noarch.rpm perl(base) perl(MIME::Base64) perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.0) perl(strict) perl(warnings) = perl-Lingua-Flags-0.05-1.fc12.src.rpm = rpmlint 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. provides for perl-Lingua-Flags-0.05-1.fc12.src.rpm requires for perl-Lingua-Flags-0.05-1.fc12.src.rpm perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker) perl(Test::More) perl(Test::Pod) perl(Test::Pod::Coverage) APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 501134] Review Request: rubygem-mongrel_cluster - GemPlugin wrapper for the mongrel HTTP server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501134 --- Comment #5 from Robert Scheck redhat-bugzi...@linuxnetz.de 2009-05-24 19:03:56 EDT --- How to handle subsys, if the initscript starts for each configuration file an own cluster (bunch of processes)? Note that each cluster can be independet of the other clusters started and stopped. When looking around, there's either broken subsys handling (subsys created if only one/all is started/stopped) or simply none if a similar behaviour exists. Ideas? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502352] Review Request: php-markdown - Markdown implementation in PHP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502352 Rakesh Pandit rpan...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Rakesh Pandit rpan...@redhat.com 2009-05-24 19:16:34 EDT --- PHP Markdown can work as a optional plug-in for Wordpress. I will inform maintainer. Thanks! New Package CVS Request === Package Name: php-markdown Short Description: Markdown implementation in PHP Owners: rakesh Branches: F-9 F-10 F-11 InitialCC: Cvsextras Commits: yes -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490061] Review Request: awesfx - Utility programs for AWE32/Emu10k1
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490061
--- Comment #5 from Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de 2009-05-24
22:08:57 EDT ---
FIX - MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted
in the review.
$ rpmlint Desktop/awesfx-0.5.1c-1.src.rpm
awesfx.src: W: non-coherent-filename awesfx-0.5.1c-1.src.rpm
awesfx-0.5.1c-1.fc10.src.rpm
OK - MUST: The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
FIX - MUST: The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
OK - MUST: The package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
OK - MUST: The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
Licensing Guidelines: GPLv2+
FIX - MUST: The License field in the package spec file matches the actual
license.
OK - MUST: The license file from the source package is included in %doc.
OK - MUST: The spec file is in American English.
OK - MUST: The spec file for the package is legible.
OK - MUST: The sources used to build the package match the upstream source by
MD5 73f940279f909bfa5ad307d904bc88da
OK - MUST: The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on
i386
N/A - MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch.
OK - MUST: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
N/A - MUST: The spec file handles locales properly with the %find_lang macro.
N/A - MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared
library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths,
must call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
N/A - MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must
state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package.
FIX - MUST: The package does not all directories that it creates
OK - MUST: The package does not contain any duplicate files in the %files
listing.
OK - MUST: Permissions on files are set properly. Every %files section includes
a %defattr(...) line.
OK - MUST: The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot}.
OK - MUST: The package consistently uses macros, as described in the macros
section of Packaging Guidelines.
OK - MUST: The package contains code, or permissable content.
OK - MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -doc subpackage.
OK - MUST: Files included as %doc do not affect the runtime of the application.
N/A - MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
N/A - MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
N/A - MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires:
pkgconfig'.
N/A - MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in
a -devel package.
N/A - MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release}
OK - MUST: The package does not contain any .la libtool archives.
N/A - MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the
%install section.
OK - MUST: The packages does not own files or directories already owned by
other packages.
OK - MUST: At the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf %{buildroot}.
OK - MUST: All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8.
SHOULD Items:
N/A - SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
N/A - SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file
should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
OK - SHOULD: The the package builds in mock.
OK - SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all
supported architectures.
OK - SHOULD: The package functions as described.
N/A - SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane.
N/A - SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency.
N/A - SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends on their usecase,
and this is usually for development purposes, so should be placed in a -devel
pkg.
N/A - SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin,
/sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the
file instead of the file itself.
OK - SHOULD: uses opt_flags and smp_mflags
Issues:
- Package does not match the naming guidelines, Correct is version 0.5.1
release 1%{?dist} see
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Post-Release_packages
- change License tag to GPLv2+, take a look at the source
- You are not owning
[Bug 498363] Review Request: wordpress-plugin-add-to-any-subscribe - Add to Any Subscribe Button plugin for WordPress
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=498363 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-05-24 22:31:54 EDT --- wordpress-plugin-add-to-any-subscribe-0.9.6.4.1-1.fc11,wordpress-plugin-add-to-any-0.9.9.2.3-1.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/wordpress-plugin-add-to-any-subscribe-0.9.6.4.1-1.fc11,wordpress-plugin-add-to-any-0.9.9.2.3-1.fc11 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 498363] Review Request: wordpress-plugin-add-to-any-subscribe - Add to Any Subscribe Button plugin for WordPress
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=498363 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-05-24 22:31:44 EDT --- wordpress-plugin-add-to-any-subscribe-0.9.6.4.1-1.fc10,wordpress-plugin-add-to-any-0.9.9.2.3-1.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/wordpress-plugin-add-to-any-subscribe-0.9.6.4.1-1.fc10,wordpress-plugin-add-to-any-0.9.9.2.3-1.fc10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 498362] Review Request: wordpress-plugin-add-to-any - Add to Any: Share/Bookmark/Email Button plugin for WordPress
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=498362 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-05-24 22:31:49 EDT --- wordpress-plugin-add-to-any-subscribe-0.9.6.4.1-1.fc11,wordpress-plugin-add-to-any-0.9.9.2.3-1.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/wordpress-plugin-add-to-any-subscribe-0.9.6.4.1-1.fc11,wordpress-plugin-add-to-any-0.9.9.2.3-1.fc11 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 498362] Review Request: wordpress-plugin-add-to-any - Add to Any: Share/Bookmark/Email Button plugin for WordPress
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=498362 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-05-24 22:31:39 EDT --- wordpress-plugin-add-to-any-subscribe-0.9.6.4.1-1.fc10,wordpress-plugin-add-to-any-0.9.9.2.3-1.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/wordpress-plugin-add-to-any-subscribe-0.9.6.4.1-1.fc10,wordpress-plugin-add-to-any-0.9.9.2.3-1.fc10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502101] Review Request: agedu - An utility for tracking down wasted disk space
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502101 David Nalley da...@gnsa.us changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||da...@gnsa.us AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|da...@gnsa.us Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502101] Review Request: agedu - An utility for tracking down wasted disk space
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502101 --- Comment #1 from David Nalley da...@gnsa.us 2009-05-24 23:32:31 EDT --- Jussi: I am about to disconnect for the evening and will try and do the balance of this review shortly. However, wanted to give you a heads up on a problem: I grabbed source (5 times to make sure it wasn't something upstream) and the md5sum on all 5 of the copies is the same, and doesn't match source included in src.rpm: [ke4...@nalleyt61 SOURCES]$ md5sum agedu-r8442.tar.gz* 7be87e9a6a8b26a7ef3fe80bc45b6792 agedu-r8442.tar.gz 1d92b5ac8e5368c9ad7b9be5ecc56cb1 agedu-r8442.tar.gz.1 1d92b5ac8e5368c9ad7b9be5ecc56cb1 agedu-r8442.tar.gz.2 1d92b5ac8e5368c9ad7b9be5ecc56cb1 agedu-r8442.tar.gz.3 1d92b5ac8e5368c9ad7b9be5ecc56cb1 agedu-r8442.tar.gz.4 1d92b5ac8e5368c9ad7b9be5ecc56cb1 agedu-r8442.tar.gz.5 As I said I'll try and have the rest of the review done tomorrow sometime. Cheers -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502222] Review Request: perl-Carp-Clan-Share - Share your Carp::Clan settings with your whole Clan
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=50 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2009-05-24 23:43:12 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock (rawhide i586). koji Build =http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1370829 + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. + source files match upstream url dcb5195cd172ceb5367599f7cb36e500c1ce7211 Carp-Clan-Share-0.013.tar.gz + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc is present. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code, not content. + no headers or static libraries. + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage + no .la files. + no translations are available + Does owns the directories it creates. + no scriptlets present. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + make test gave All tests successful. Files=4, Tests=7, 0 wallclock secs ( 0.04 usr 0.02 sys + 0.16 cusr 0.04 csys = 0.26 CPU) + Package perl-Carp-Clan-Share-0.013-1.fc12.noarch = Provides: perl(Carp::Clan::Share) = 0.013 Requires: perl(Carp::Clan) perl(strict) perl(warnings) + Not a GUI application APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502054] Review Request: perl-Lingua-Flags - Provide small flag icons
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502054 Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502054] Review Request: perl-Lingua-Flags - Provide small flag icons
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502054 Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502222] Review Request: perl-Carp-Clan-Share - Share your Carp::Clan settings with your whole Clan
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=50 Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502222] Review Request: perl-Carp-Clan-Share - Share your Carp::Clan settings with your whole Clan
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=50 --- Comment #2 from Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com 2009-05-24 23:45:25 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-Carp-Clan-Share Short Description: Share your Carp::Clan settings with your whole Clan Owners: iarnell Branches: F-10 F-11 InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502323] Review Request: perl-Class-DBI-Plugin-DeepAbstractSearch - SQL::Abstract for Class::DBI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502323 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||panem...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2009-05-24 23:43:04 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock (rawhide i586). koji Build =http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1373749 + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. + source files match upstream url a81ed8446fb4c990211e203b08f98f472cb83774 Class-DBI-Plugin-DeepAbstractSearch-0.08.tar.gz + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc is present. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code, not content. + no headers or static libraries. + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage + no .la files. + no translations are available + Does owns the directories it creates. + no scriptlets present. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + make test gave All tests successful. Files=1, Tests=0, 0 wallclock secs ( 0.04 usr 0.01 sys + 0.03 cusr 0.01 csys = 0.09 CPU) + Package perl-Class-DBI-Plugin-DeepAbstractSearch-0.08-1.fc12.noarch = Provides: perl(Class::DBI::Plugin::DeepAbstractSearch) = 0.08 Requires: perl(SQL::Abstract) perl(base) perl(strict) perl(warnings) + Not a GUI application APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502054] Review Request: perl-Lingua-Flags - Provide small flag icons
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502054 --- Comment #3 from Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com 2009-05-24 23:45:05 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-Lingua-Flags Short Description: Provide small flag icons Owners: iarnell Branches: F-10 F-11 InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 501228] Review Request: mod_selinux - An apache module to launch web applications with restrictive privileges
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501228 KaiGai Kohei kai...@kaigai.gr.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from KaiGai Kohei kai...@kaigai.gr.jp 2009-05-24 23:54:11 EDT --- Thanks for your reviewing. New Package CVS Request === Package Name: mod_selinux Short Description: Apache/SELinux plus module Owners: kaigai Branches: F-11 InitialCC: kai...@ak.jp.nec.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 501831] Review Request: python-testosterone - Text-based UI for running Python unit tests
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501831 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||panem...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2009-05-25 00:09:56 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock (rawhide i586). koji Build =http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1367313 + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. + source files match upstream url b9566d407696277b272e7bc76c66c498415e0a4b testosterone-0.4.1.tgz + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc is present. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code, not content. + no headers or static libraries. + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage + no .la files. + no translations are available + Does owns the directories it creates. + no scriptlets present. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + Not a GUI application Suggestions: 1) You should contact upstream to add license text in tarball or in source files 2) you should use %global instead of %define in SPEC file. APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502307] Review Request:sil-charis-compact-fonts - A version of Charis SIL with tighter line spacing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502307 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||panem...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2009-05-25 00:03:23 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock (rawhide i586). koji Build =http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1375245 + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. + source files match upstream url 3d6f4a0b716c834fa5236762c0fc0ec20517311a CharisSILCompact4.106.zip + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc is present. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Does owns the directories it creates. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + Followed fonts packaging guidelines. APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 493247] Review Request: perl-Gnome2-Wnck -- Perl interface to the Window Navigator Construction Kit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=493247 --- Comment #14 from Liang Suilong liangsuil...@gmail.com 2009-05-25 00:42:47 EDT --- Does anyone review my CVS request? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 493250] Review Request: perl-Goo-Canvas -- Goo::Canvas Perl interface to the GooCanvas
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=493250 --- Comment #23 from Liang Suilong liangsuil...@gmail.com 2009-05-25 00:41:04 EDT --- OK.. But after I rename perltetris.pl, Should I create symbolic link whose name is perltetris.pl to connect the new file. I think that if some applications need perltetris.pl, it will appear some errors. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458430] Review Request: lcdf-typetools - Tools for manipulating OpenType and PostScript fonts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458430 Parag pnem...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pnem...@redhat.com --- Comment #11 from Parag pnem...@redhat.com 2009-05-25 00:53:14 EDT --- Ok. So no progress here and meantime I also forgot to look at new package queue and now I have submitted new package request for lcdf-typetools in review bug 501854. If submitter still interested then I will drop my request otherwise I will be happy to maintain this package. Hmm. Not much used TEX but I just want to have this package in fedora so if someone interested and knowing well TEX, he can maintain or co-maintain this package in review 501854. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502323] Review Request: perl-Class-DBI-Plugin-DeepAbstractSearch - SQL::Abstract for Class::DBI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502323 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 502323] Review Request: perl-Class-DBI-Plugin-DeepAbstractSearch - SQL::Abstract for Class::DBI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502323 --- Comment #2 from Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 2009-05-25 01:45:22 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-Class-DBI-Plugin-DeepAbstractSearch Short Description: SQL::Abstract for Class::DBI Owners: cweyl Branches: F-9 F-10 F-11 devel InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
