[Bug 744522] Review Request: perl-Moo - Minimalist Object Orientation (with Moose compatibility)
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=744522 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-10-11 03:38:30 EDT --- perl-Moo-0.009011-1.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Moo-0.009011-1.fc16 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 744522] Review Request: perl-Moo - Minimalist Object Orientation (with Moose compatibility)
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=744522 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED Bug 744522 depends on bug 742742, which changed state. Bug 742742 Summary: Review Request: perl-strictures - Turn on strict and make all warnings fatal https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=742742 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||ERRATA Status|ON_QA |CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 693204] Review Request: php-bartlett-PHP-CompatInfo - Find out version and the extensions required for a piece of code to run
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=693204 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|php-bartlett-PHP-CompatInfo |php-bartlett-PHP-CompatInfo |-2.1.0-3.el6|-2.1.0-3.fc15 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-10-11 04:28:22 EDT --- php-bartlett-PHP-CompatInfo-2.1.0-3.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 693200] Review Request: php-bartlett-PHP-Reflect - Adds the ability to reverse-engineer 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=693200 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|php-bartlett-PHP-Reflect-1. |php-bartlett-PHP-Reflect-1. |0.2-2.el6 |0.2-2.fc15 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-10-11 04:30:54 EDT --- php-bartlett-PHP-Reflect-1.0.2-2.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 739832] Review Request: django-authenticator - authentication client for django
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=739832 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|django-authenticator-0.1.4- |django-authenticator-0.1.4- |2.fc16 |2.fc15 Bug 739832 depends on bug 739858, which changed state. Bug 739858 Summary: Review Request: python-import-utils - A module that supports simple programmatic module imports https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=739858 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||ERRATA Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Bug 739832 depends on bug 739908, which changed state. Bug 739908 Summary: Review Request: python-wordpress-xmlrpc - WordPress XML-RPC API Integration Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=739908 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||ERRATA Status|ON_QA |CLOSED --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-10-11 04:30:25 EDT --- django-authenticator-0.1.4-2.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 713990] Review Request: bzr-fastimport - Bzr plugin for fast loading of data from other VCS 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=713990 --- Comment #10 from Jelmer Vernooij jel...@samba.org 2011-10-11 04:43:40 EDT --- It should indeed be GPLv2 *or later* - I've committed a fix to trunk. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 744948] Review Request: ubuntu-mono-icon-theme - Ubuntu Mono icon theme
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=744948 Elad Alfassa el...@doom.co.il changed: What|Removed |Added CC||el...@doom.co.il Depends on||182235(FE-Legal) --- Comment #1 from Elad Alfassa el...@doom.co.il 2011-10-11 04:58:02 EDT --- Isn't Ubuntu a trademark? Blocking FE-Legal for now, until it's clear. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 741900] Review Request: grinder - A tool for synchronizing repositories and their contents
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=741900
Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||volke...@gmx.at
--- Comment #2 from Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at 2011-10-11 06:18:50 EDT
---
The license file is in the source package twice. One copy is included, that's
fine.
Does the unit test work?
You can leave out the -n grinder-%{version}, because that is exactly what the
setup macro expects.
If you're not going for EPEL 4, you can remove defattr.
You should probably only define python_sitelib on systems that don't define it:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Macros
It seems to me, python-hashlib is part of the Python package, at least from 2.5
on.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 741900] Review Request: grinder - A tool for synchronizing repositories and their contents
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=741900 --- Comment #3 from Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at 2011-10-11 06:19:46 EDT --- Whatever happened to the line-breaks! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 743410] Review Request: drupal7-login_destination - Customize login landing page in Drupal 7
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=743410 Peter Borsa peter.bo...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||peter.bo...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|peter.bo...@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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 743411] Review Request: drupal7-theme-ninesixty - Ninesixty theme for Drupal 7
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=743411 Peter Borsa peter.bo...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||peter.bo...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|peter.bo...@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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 743409] Review Request: drupal7-diff - Show diff-type changes in Drupal 7
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=743409 Peter Borsa peter.bo...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||peter.bo...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|peter.bo...@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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 744224] Review Request: perl-XML-SAX-Base - Base class SAX Drivers and Filters
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=744224 --- Comment #7 from Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com 2011-10-11 07:56:35 EDT --- Now it's installed in documentation directory. I suppose now it could be ready for re-review under same links. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731050] Re-Review Request: mrepo - A tool to set up a yum/apt mirror from various sources
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=731050
--- Comment #5 from Jessica Jones fed...@zaniyah.org 2011-10-11 08:39:28 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #4)
$ rpmlint /home/msuchy/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/mrepo-0.8.7-4.fc15.noarch.rpm
/home/msuchy/rpmbuild/SRPMS/mrepo-0.8.7-4.fc15.src.rpm
... (omitted for readability) ...
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 11 errors, 18 warnings.
You should contact upstream to correct FSF address in GPL license text
There is no need to set execute bit for python scripts in /usr/share.
I encouradge you to write missing pages and send them to upstream. If you
never
write man page then asciidoc is good start.
http://www.methods.co.nz/asciidoc/
mrepo.noarch: E: non-readable /etc/mrepo.conf 0600L
This can be waived as this configuration file can contain login and password.
Spelling is OK, but rhn, which should be RHN.
Okay, will fix that.
mrepo.src:20: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 20, tab: line 1)
This is self-explanatory.
mrepo.src: W: invalid-url Source0: mrepo-0.8.7.tar.bz2
Tar is now available at
http://dag.wieers.com/home-made/mrepo/mrepo-0.8.7.tar.bz2
Please fix Source0.
Additionally:
Most libraries in:
/usr/share/mrepo/up2date_client/
are copied from package rhn-client-tools
and libraries in:
/usr/share/mrepo/rhn
are copied from package rhnlib
Both are for some time in Fedora.
I encouradge you talk to upstream to not bundle this libraries to mrepo, but
use those libraries directly from rhnlib and rhn-client-tools.
Okay I will liaise with upstream on this and the other issues.
Buildroots and fedattr are obsoleted and there is no need to specify them.
Well
at least on Fedora (still needed on RHEL).
I assume there is a way around this so that it can be in EPEL too? (This is
surely on a wiki page somewhere?)
Instead of
%{_sysconfdir}/rc.d/init.d
you can use macrot:
%{_initddir}
Thanks. This last is recommended, or just for info?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 702209] Review Request: apache-commons-vfs - Provides a single API for accessing various different file systems
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=702209 Stanislav Ochotnicky socho...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||736626 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731050] Re-Review Request: mrepo - A tool to set up a yum/apt mirror from various sources
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=731050 --- Comment #6 from Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com 2011-10-11 08:50:02 EDT --- I assume there is a way around this so that it can be in EPEL too? (This is surely on a wiki page somewhere?) http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag So it need only in EPEL5 and you should put it there only in that git branch. However nothing will happen if you are as lazy as me and will leave it in Fedora branch as well. So just recommendation. Thanks. This last is recommended, or just for info? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Macros as it said: strongly recommended :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731050] Re-Review Request: mrepo - A tool to set up a yum/apt mirror from various sources
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=731050 Jessica Jones fed...@zaniyah.org changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||684899 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 745123] New: Review request: cryptsetup
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review request: cryptsetup https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=745123 Summary: Review request: cryptsetup Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mb...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Rename project from cryptsetup-luks to cryptsetup (according to upstream name). Spec URL: http://mbroz.fedorapeople.org/review/cryptsetup.spec SRPM URL: http://mbroz.fedorapeople.org/review/cryptsetup-1.4.0-0.1.fc17.src.rpm Diff to last cryptsetup-luks.spec: http://mbroz.fedorapeople.org/review/spec.diff # rpmlint cryptsetup.spec cryptsetup.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: http://cryptsetup.googlecode.com/files/cryptsetup-1.4.0-rc1.tar.bz2 HTTP Error 404: Not Found 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. (known bug, file is there) # rpmlint cryptsetup-1.4.0-0.1.fc17.src.rpm cryptsetup.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dm - d, m, dim cryptsetup.src: W: invalid-url Source0: http://cryptsetup.googlecode.com/files/cryptsetup-1.4.0-rc1.tar.bz2 HTTP Error 404: Not Found 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. # rpmlint cryptsetup*.rpm cryptsetup.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dm - d, m, dim cryptsetup.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/cryptsetup-1.4.0/COPYING cryptsetup-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/cryptsetup-1.4.0-rc1/lib/libdevmapper.c cryptsetup-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/cryptsetup-1.4.0-rc1/lib/utils_wipe.c cryptsetup-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/cryptsetup-1.4.0-rc1/lib/random.c cryptsetup-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/cryptsetup-1.4.0-rc1/lib/utils_debug.c cryptsetup-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/cryptsetup-1.4.0-rc1/lib/utils_devpath.c cryptsetup-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/cryptsetup-1.4.0-rc1/lib/luks1/af.c cryptsetup-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/cryptsetup-1.4.0-rc1/lib/utils.c cryptsetup-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/cryptsetup-1.4.0-rc1/lib/crypt_plain.c cryptsetup-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/cryptsetup-1.4.0-rc1/lib/setup.c cryptsetup-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/cryptsetup-1.4.0-rc1/lib/utils_crypt.c cryptsetup-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/cryptsetup-1.4.0-rc1/lib/crypto_backend/crypto_gcrypt.c cryptsetup-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/cryptsetup-1.4.0-rc1/lib/loopaes/loopaes.c cryptsetup-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/cryptsetup-1.4.0-rc1/lib/luks1/keymanage.c cryptsetup-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/cryptsetup-1.4.0-rc1/lib/luks1/keyencryption.c cryptsetup-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/cryptsetup-1.4.0-rc1/lib/volumekey.c cryptsetup-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/cryptsetup-1.4.0-rc1/src/cryptsetup.c cryptsetup-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/cryptsetup-1.4.0-rc1/lib/utils_loop.c cryptsetup-libs.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libcryptsetup - cryptically cryptsetup-libs.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/cryptsetup-libs-1.4.0/COPYING 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 19 errors, 2 warnings. (Ignoring fsf address, I cannot change upstream license every time they move to new office! Other are false positives.) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 731050] Re-Review Request: mrepo - A tool to set up a yum/apt mirror from various sources
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=731050
Yury V. Zaytsev y...@shurup.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||y...@shurup.com
--- Comment #7 from Yury V. Zaytsev y...@shurup.com 2011-10-11 09:16:13 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #4)
Instead of
%{_sysconfdir}/rc.d/init.d
you can use macrot:
%{_initddir}
Just FYI, it's %{_initrddir} if you want to be RHEL5-compatible, although
deprecated in favor of more correct %{_initddir} on RHEL6+.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 744948] Review Request: ubuntu-mono-icon-theme - Ubuntu Mono icon theme
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=744948 Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tcall...@redhat.com --- Comment #2 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2011-10-11 10:11:02 EDT --- Yes. This needs a few changes: * It must be renamed to not use the Ubuntu or Canonical trademarks. * It must not include the Ubuntu or Canonical logos at all. You cannot simply delete them, they must not be in the tarball for distribution. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 745160] Review Request: apper - KDE interface for PackageKit
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=745160 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||669357(F16Target-kde), ||656997(kde-reviews) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 745160] New: Review Request: apper - KDE interface for PackageKit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: apper - KDE interface for PackageKit https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=745160 Summary: Review Request: apper - KDE interface for PackageKit Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: rdie...@math.unl.edu QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Spec URL: http://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/apper/apper.spec SRPM URL: http://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/apper/apper-0.7.0-1.fc15.src.rpm Description: KDE interface for PackageKit This is kpackagekit renamed/rebranded as apper, so includes Obsoletes/Provides -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 744492] Review Request: rtmidi - Library for realtime MIDI input/output
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=744492 Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||tcall...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|tcall...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2011-10-11 10:39:44 EDT --- == REVIEW == rpmlint output: rtmidi.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) realtime - mealtime, real time, real-time rtmidi.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US realtime - mealtime, real time, real-time rtmidi.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) realtime - mealtime, real time, real-time rtmidi.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US realtime - mealtime, real time, real-time rtmidi-jack.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) realtime - mealtime, real time, real-time rtmidi-jack.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US realtime - mealtime, real time, real-time All safe to ignore. - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license (MIT) OK, text in %doc, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream (b1aaa6ff72e1385a7a29b4a2ab60c49863663bdf8c55bac93d548aacc8b6bc56) - package compiles on f16 (x86_64) - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - no locales - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - no need for .desktop file - devel package ok - no .la files - post/postun ldconfig ok - devel requires base packages n-v-r APPROVED. Nice work with the patching, hopefully upstream will take it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 722640] Review Request: R-qcc - SQC package for R
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=722640 --- Comment #6 from John J. McDonough wb8...@arrl.net 2011-10-11 11:26:02 EDT --- Yes, still fixing release notes bugs after digging out from post-FUDcon email avalanche. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 730644] Review Request: svgSalamander - An SVG engine for Java
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=730644 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 713990] Review Request: bzr-fastimport - Bzr plugin for fast loading of data from other VCS 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=713990 --- Comment #11 from Pierre-YvesChibon pin...@pingoured.fr 2011-10-11 12:03:25 EDT --- Ok since upstream confirm the typo, could you please update the spec and the release by adding a comment about this file with a link to the commit. I will approve the new version -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 730644] Review Request: svgSalamander - An SVG engine for Java
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=730644 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-10-11 12:03:37 EDT --- svgsalamander-0.0-4.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/svgsalamander-0.0-4.fc15 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 732215] Review Request: mined - Powerful Text Editor
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=732215 --- Comment #6 from Pierre-YvesChibon pin...@pingoured.fr 2011-10-11 12:05:31 EDT --- @ Matthieu, do you have a new version of this package taking the given remarks into account ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 730644] Review Request: svgSalamander - An SVG engine for Java
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=730644 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-10-11 12:05:58 EDT --- svgsalamander-0.0-4.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/svgsalamander-0.0-4.fc16 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 743411] Review Request: drupal7-theme-ninesixty - Ninesixty theme for Drupal 7
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=743411
Peter Borsa peter.bo...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Peter Borsa peter.bo...@gmail.com 2011-10-11 12:12:48 EDT
---
MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted
in the review.
$ rpmlint Downloads/drupal7-theme-ninesixty.spec
Downloads/drupal7-theme-ninesixty-1.0-1.fc16.src.rpm
1 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming
Guidelines.
MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the
format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines .
MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package must be included in %doc.
MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no
upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.
$ md5sum Downloads/ninesixty-7.x-1.0.tar.gz ; curl -s -o -
http://ftp.drupal.org/files/projects/ninesixty-7.x-1.0.tar.gz | md5sum -
360b3412b4055c2e0df3cbdac71f0e74 Downloads/ninesixty-7.x-1.0.tar.gz
360b3412b4055c2e0df3cbdac71f0e74 -
MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
N/A noarch package
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. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line.
MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
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.
MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
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. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker.
MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create
a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does create
that directory.
MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific situations)
MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with
executable permissions, for example.
MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The definition
of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not restricted to
size. Large can refer to either size or quantity).
MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime
of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run
properly if it is not present.
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: 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}%{?_isa} =
%{version}-%{release}
MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be removed
in the spec if they are built.
MUST: Packages containing GUI
[Bug 743410] Review Request: drupal7-login_destination - Customize login landing page in Drupal 7
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=743410
Peter Borsa peter.bo...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Peter Borsa peter.bo...@gmail.com 2011-10-11 12:15:38 EDT
---
MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted
in the review.
$ rpmlint Downloads/drupal7-login_destination.spec
Downloads/drupal7-login_destination-1.0-1.fc16.src.rpm
drupal7-login_destination.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) login - loin,
logic, lo gin
1 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming
Guidelines.
MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the
format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines .
MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package must be included in %doc.
MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no
upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.
$ md5sum Downloads/login_destination-7.x-1.0.tar.gz ; curl -s -o -
http://ftp.drupal.org/files/projects/login_destination-7.x-1.0.tar.gz | md5sum
-
a86d6cbe60b787b60f44f217e64fb93f Downloads/login_destination-7.x-1.0.tar.gz
a86d6cbe60b787b60f44f217e64fb93f -
MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
N/A noarch package
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. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line.
MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
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.
MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
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. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker.
MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create
a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does create
that directory.
MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific situations)
MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with
executable permissions, for example.
MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The definition
of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not restricted to
size. Large can refer to either size or quantity).
MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime
of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run
properly if it is not present.
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: 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}%{?_isa} =
%{version}-%{release}
MUST: Packages must NOT
[Bug 739856] Review Request: opendbx - abstraction library for database access 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=739856 --- Comment #8 from Pierre-YvesChibon pin...@pingoured.fr 2011-10-11 12:33:59 EDT --- After getting more information on the subject, Dan and Ralf are correct and Dan's solution is the desired one. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 744492] Review Request: rtmidi - Library for realtime MIDI input/output
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=744492 Robin Lee robinlee.s...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Robin Lee robinlee.s...@gmail.com 2011-10-11 12:29:56 EDT --- Thank you! New Package SCM Request === Package Name: rtmidi Short Description: Library for realtime MIDI input/output Owners: cheeselee Branches: f15 f16 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 744492] Review Request: rtmidi - Library for realtime MIDI input/output
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=744492 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2011-10-11 12:36:16 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 732215] Review Request: mined - Powerful Text Editor
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=732215 --- Comment #7 from Matthieu Saulnier casper.le.fan...@gmail.com 2011-10-11 12:34:24 EDT --- Not yet, the developer need some more time. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 744347] Review Request: python-simpleparse - a parser generator
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=744347
Pierre-YvesChibon pin...@pingoured.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pin...@pingoured.fr
--- Comment #1 from Pierre-YvesChibon pin...@pingoured.fr 2011-10-11 12:40:17
EDT ---
I believe you should use %global instead of %define.
Also, why :
%exclude %{python_sitearch}/simpleparse/tests
%exclude %{python_sitearch}/simpleparse/examples
?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 743162] Review Request: python-concurrentloghandler - Concurrent logging handler
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=743162 Pierre-YvesChibon pin...@pingoured.fr changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pin...@pingoured.fr --- Comment #1 from Pierre-YvesChibon pin...@pingoured.fr 2011-10-11 12:46:34 EDT --- I believe you should use %global instead of %define. Otherwise, do you plan to have this on epel ? If not, you can do some cleaning: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#.25clean http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#File_Permissions http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Macros -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 743409] Review Request: drupal7-diff - Show diff-type changes in Drupal 7
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=743409 Peter Borsa peter.bo...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Peter Borsa peter.bo...@gmail.com 2011-10-11 13:01:52 EDT --- I've reviewed as well and gotten the same as Scott. Thank you, Scott! APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 745216] New: Review Request: lwp - C library for user-mode threading
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: lwp - C library for user-mode threading https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=745216 Summary: Review Request: lwp - C library for user-mode threading Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: tcall...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Spec URL: http://spot.fedorapeople.org/lwp.spec SRPM URL: http://spot.fedorapeople.org/lwp-2.6-3.fc15.src.rpm Koji Rawhide Scratch Build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3423378 Description: The LWP user-space threads library. The LWP threads library is used by the Coda distributed file-system, RVM (a persistent VM library), and RPC2/SFTP (remote procedure call library). NOTE: This package was previously in Fedora and was retired due to FTBFS, but it builds fine these days. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 745216] Review Request: lwp - C library for user-mode threading
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=745216 Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||745219 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 745219] Review Request: rvm - C library for unstructured recoverable virtual memory
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=745219 Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||745216 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 745216] Review Request: lwp - C library for user-mode threading
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=745216 Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||745218 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 745218] Review Request: rpc2 - C library for remote procedure calls over UDP
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=745218 Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||745216 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 745218] New: Review Request: rpc2 - C library for remote procedure calls over UDP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: rpc2 - C library for remote procedure calls over UDP https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=745218 Summary: Review Request: rpc2 - C library for remote procedure calls over UDP Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: tcall...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Spec URL: http://spot.fedorapeople.org/rpc2.spec SRPM URL: http://spot.fedorapeople.org/rpc2-2.10-3.fc15.src.rpm Description: The RPC2 library, a C library for remote procedure calls over UDP. NOTE: This package was previously in Fedora and was retired due to FTBFS, but it builds fine these days. It depends on lwp to build, hence, no koji rawhide scratch build. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 745219] New: Review Request: rvm - C library for unstructured recoverable virtual memory
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: rvm - C library for unstructured recoverable virtual memory https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=745219 Summary: Review Request: rvm - C library for unstructured recoverable virtual memory Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: tcall...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Spec URL: http://spot.fedorapeople.org/rvm.spec SRPM URL: http://spot.fedorapeople.org/rvm-1.17-4.fc15.src.rpm Description: The RVM persistent recoverable memory library. The RVM library is used by the Coda distributed filesystem. NOTE: This package was previously in Fedora and was retired due to FTBFS, but it builds fine these days. It depends on lwp to build, hence, no koji rawhide scratch build. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 695022] Review Request: pygtkhelpers - assists the building of PyGTK applications
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=695022 Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||l...@jcomserv.net --- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2011-10-11 12:58:20 EDT --- Any update? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 745216] Review Request: lwp - C library for user-mode threading
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=745216 Stephen Gallagher sgall...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sgall...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|sgall...@redhat.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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 745218] Review Request: rpc2 - C library for remote procedure calls over UDP
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=745218 Pierre-YvesChibon pin...@pingoured.fr changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pin...@pingoured.fr AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|pin...@pingoured.fr -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 745216] Review Request: lwp - C library for user-mode threading
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=745216 Stephen Gallagher sgall...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Stephen Gallagher sgall...@redhat.com 2011-10-11 13:43:36 EDT --- RPMlint: lwp.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/liblwp.so.2.0.9 exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 lwp-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation This package looks fine to me. Approved. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 745216] Review Request: lwp - C library for user-mode threading
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=745216 Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2011-10-11 13:45:48 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: lwp New Branches: f16 Owners: spot InitialCC: This package is being revived. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 745218] Review Request: rpc2 - C library for remote procedure calls over UDP
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=745218
Pierre-YvesChibon pin...@pingoured.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Pierre-YvesChibon pin...@pingoured.fr 2011-10-11 14:01:49
EDT ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
[x] : MUST - Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x] : MUST - Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[x] : MUST - Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=...
doesn't work.
[x] : MUST - Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[!] : MUST - Rpmlint output is silent.
rpc2-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary rp2gen
rpc2.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/librpc2.so.5.4.5
exit@GLIBC_2.2.5
rpc2.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libse.so.5.4.5
exit@GLIBC_2.2.5
(none): E: no installed packages by name Wrote:
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.
[x] : MUST - Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
/home/pierrey/tmp/reviewhelper/745218/rpc2-2.10.tar.gz :
MD5SUM this package : 545066e67d95325840a79d163098096b
MD5SUM upstream package : 545066e67d95325840a79d163098096b
[x] : MUST - Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[-] : MUST - %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified.
[-] : MUST - Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop using
desktop-file-install file if it is a GUI application.
[-] : MUST - The spec file handles locales properly.
[-] : MUST - No %config files under /usr.
[x] : MUST - Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x] : MUST - ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x] : MUST - Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x] : MUST - Package does not contains kernel modules.
[x] : MUST - Package contains no static executables.
[x] : MUST - Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x] : MUST - Package is not relocatable.
[x] : MUST - Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] : MUST - Static libraries in -static subpackage, if present.
[x] : MUST - Package has adequate build section.
[x] : MUST - Package contains the mandatory BuildRequires.
[x] : MUST - Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at
least one supported architecture.
[x] : MUST - Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and
meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x] : MUST - %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x] : MUST - All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] : MUST - Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x] : MUST - Changelog in prescribed format.
[x] : MUST - Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x] : MUST - Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x] : MUST - Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] : MUST - Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x] : MUST - Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x] : MUST - Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] : MUST - Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[-] : MUST - Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[x] : MUST - If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %doc.
[x] : MUST - License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x] : MUST - License file installed when any subpackage combination is
installed.
[x] : MUST - Package consistently uses macros. instead of hard-coded directory
names.
[x] : MUST - Package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
[x] : MUST - Package does not generates any conflict.
[x] : MUST - Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x] : MUST - Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x] : MUST - Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x] : MUST - Package installs properly.
[x] : MUST - Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x] : MUST - Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-] : MUST - Package contains a SysV-style init script if in need of one.
[x] : MUST - File names are valid UTF-8.
[x] : MUST - Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x] : SHOULD - Dist tag is present.
[x] : SHOULD - SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}.
[x] : SHOULD - SourceX is a working URL.
[x] : SHOULD -
[Bug 702209] Review Request: apache-commons-vfs2 - Provides a single API for accessing various different file systems
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=702209 Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |apache-commons-vfs -|apache-commons-vfs2 - |Provides a single API for |Provides a single API for |accessing various different |accessing various different |file systems|file systems --- Comment #4 from Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com 2011-10-11 14:00:02 EDT --- http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/apache-commons-vfs2.spec http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/apache-commons-vfs2-2.0-1.fc15.src.rpm * Tue Oct 11 2011 Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com 2.0-1 - Update to 2.0 - Cleanup requires * Fri Jun 3 2011 Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com 1.0-3 - Add license to javadoc package FYI - commons-compress is needed for the build, but I removed it from Requires. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 745218] Review Request: rpc2 - C library for remote procedure calls over UDP
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=745218 Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2011-10-11 14:07:34 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: rpc2 New Branches: f16 Owners: spot InitialCC: This package is being revived. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 744224] Review Request: perl-XML-SAX-Base - Base class SAX Drivers and Filters
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=744224
Mario Blättermann mari...@freenet.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #8 from Mario Blättermann mari...@freenet.de 2011-10-11 14:06:00
EDT ---
Koji scratch build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3423507
$ rpmlint -i -v *perl-XML-SAX-Base.src: I: checking
perl-XML-SAX-Base.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US behaviour -
behavior
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
perl-XML-SAX-Base.src: I: checking-url
http://search.cpan.org/dist/XML-SAX-Base/ (timeout 10 seconds)
perl-XML-SAX-Base.src: I: checking-url
http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/G/GR/GRANTM/XML-SAX-Base-1.08.tar.gz (timeout 10
seconds)
perl-XML-SAX-Base.noarch: I: checking
perl-XML-SAX-Base.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US behaviour -
behavior
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
perl-XML-SAX-Base.noarch: I: checking-url
http://search.cpan.org/dist/XML-SAX-Base/ (timeout 10 seconds)
perl-XML-SAX-Base.spec: I: checking-url
http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/G/GR/GRANTM/XML-SAX-Base-1.08.tar.gz (timeout 10
seconds)
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
Besides the spelling errors, no issues.
-
key:
[+] OK
[.] OK, not applicable
[X] needs work
-
[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}.
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license.
GPL+ or Artistic
[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[.] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must
be included in %doc.
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source.
$ md5sum *
38c8c3247dfd080712596118d70dbe32 XML-SAX-Base-1.08.tar.gz
38c8c3247dfd080712596118d70dbe32 XML-SAX-Base-1.08.tar.gz.packaged
[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
- Succesful Koji build available.
[.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, ...
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
[.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
[.] MUST: If a package installs files below %{_datadir}/icons, the icon cache
must be updated.
[.] MUST: Packages storing shared library files (not just symlinks) must call
ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[.] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, ...
[+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates.
[+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in %files.
[+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.
[+] MUST: Packages must not provide RPM dependency information when that
information is not global in nature, or are otherwise handled.
[.] MUST: When filtering automatically generated RPM dependency information,
the filtering system implemented by Fedora must be used.
[+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
[+] MUST: Files in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application.
[.] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[.] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), ...
[.] MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned
dependency.
[.] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
[.] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file
[.] MUST: .desktop files must be properly installed with desktop-file-install
in the %install section.
[+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
[+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[.] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream...
[+] SHOULD: Timestamps of files should be preserved.
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
See Koji build above (which uses mock anyway)
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described.
I assume the
[Bug 702209] Review Request: apache-commons-vfs2 - Provides a single API for accessing various different file systems
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=702209 --- Comment #5 from Spike spikefed...@gmail.com 2011-10-11 14:11:57 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/apache-commons-vfs2.spec The link to the updated specfile is dead. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 702209] Review Request: apache-commons-vfs2 - Provides a single API for accessing various different file systems
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=702209 --- Comment #6 from Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com 2011-10-11 14:15:51 EDT --- Whoops, forgot to rename the spec. Should be there now. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 745233] Review Request: python-logger - A logging replacement for Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=745233 Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||651853 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 745233] New: Review Request: python-logger - A logging replacement for Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: python-logger - A logging replacement for Python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=745233 Summary: Review Request: python-logger - A logging replacement for Python Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: l...@jcomserv.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Logbook is a logging system for Python that replaces the standard library’s logging module. It was designed with both complex and simple applications and mind and the idea to make logging fun. What makes it fun? What about getting log messages on your phone or desktop notification system? Logbook can do that. SPEC: http://zanoni.jcomserv.net/fedora/python-logbook/python-logbook.spec SRPM: http://zanoni.jcomserv.net/fedora/python-logbook/python-logbook-0.3-1.fc15.src.rpm Needed for the newest pida. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 742555] Review Request: perl-Catalyst-Plugin-Session-Store-DBIC - Store your sessions via DBIx::Class
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=742555
Mario Blättermann mari...@freenet.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||mari...@freenet.de
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mari...@freenet.de
Flag||fedora-review+
Bug 742555 depends on bug 742548, which changed state.
Bug 742548 Summary: Review Request: perl-Catalyst-Plugin-Session-Store-Delegate
- Delegate session storage to an application model object
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=742548
What|Old Value |New Value
Resolution||ERRATA
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
--- Comment #2 from Mario Blättermann mari...@freenet.de 2011-10-11 14:23:54
EDT ---
$ rpmlint -i -v *perl-Catalyst-Plugin-Session-Store-DBIC.noarch: I: checking
perl-Catalyst-Plugin-Session-Store-DBIC.noarch: I: checking-url
http://search.cpan.org/dist/Catalyst-Plugin-Session-Store-DBIC/ (timeout 10
seconds)
perl-Catalyst-Plugin-Session-Store-DBIC.src: I: checking
perl-Catalyst-Plugin-Session-Store-DBIC.src: I: checking-url
http://search.cpan.org/dist/Catalyst-Plugin-Session-Store-DBIC/ (timeout 10
seconds)
perl-Catalyst-Plugin-Session-Store-DBIC.src: I: checking-url
http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/F/FL/FLORA/Catalyst-Plugin-Session-Store-DBIC-0.12.tar.gz
(timeout 10 seconds)
perl-Catalyst-Plugin-Session-Store-DBIC.spec: I: checking-url
http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/F/FL/FLORA/Catalyst-Plugin-Session-Store-DBIC-0.12.tar.gz
(timeout 10 seconds)
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
No issues.
-
key:
[+] OK
[.] OK, not applicable
[X] needs work
-
[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}.
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license.
GPL+ or Artistic
[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[.] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must
be included in %doc.
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source.
$ md5sum *
ae13f2cbae763eef1bbad7abcd4f618d
Catalyst-Plugin-Session-Store-DBIC-0.12.tar.gz
ae13f2cbae763eef1bbad7abcd4f618d
Catalyst-Plugin-Session-Store-DBIC-0.12.tar.gz.packaged
[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
- Succesful Koji build available.
[.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, ...
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
[.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
[.] MUST: If a package installs files below %{_datadir}/icons, the icon cache
must be updated.
[.] MUST: Packages storing shared library files (not just symlinks) must call
ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[.] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, ...
[+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates.
[+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in %files.
[+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.
[+] MUST: Packages must not provide RPM dependency information when that
information is not global in nature, or are otherwise handled.
[.] MUST: When filtering automatically generated RPM dependency information,
the filtering system implemented by Fedora must be used.
[+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
[+] MUST: Files in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application.
[.] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[.] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), ...
[.] MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned
dependency.
[.] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
[.] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file
[.] MUST: .desktop files must be properly installed with desktop-file-install
in the %install section.
[+] MUST: Packages must not own
[Bug 745216] Review Request: lwp - C library for user-mode threading
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=745216 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2011-10-11 14:24:57 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). Unretired, also, please take ownership in pkgdb. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 745218] Review Request: rpc2 - C library for remote procedure calls over UDP
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=745218 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2011-10-11 14:27:45 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). Unretired, please take ownership. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 742557] Review Request: perl-CatalystX-Profile - Profile your Catalyst application with Devel::NYTProf
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=742557
Mario Blättermann mari...@freenet.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||mari...@freenet.de
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mari...@freenet.de
Flag||fedora-review+
Bug 742557 depends on bug 742552, which changed state.
Bug 742552 Summary: Review Request: perl-CatalystX-InjectComponent - Inject
components into your Catalyst application
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=742552
What|Old Value |New Value
Resolution||ERRATA
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
--- Comment #2 from Mario Blättermann mari...@freenet.de 2011-10-11 14:32:45
EDT ---
$ rpmlint -i -v *perl-CatalystX-Profile.noarch: I: checking
perl-CatalystX-Profile.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) NYTProf -
Profanity
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
perl-CatalystX-Profile.noarch: I: checking-url
http://search.cpan.org/dist/CatalystX-Profile/ (timeout 10 seconds)
perl-CatalystX-Profile.src: I: checking
perl-CatalystX-Profile.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) NYTProf -
Profanity
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
perl-CatalystX-Profile.src: I: checking-url
http://search.cpan.org/dist/CatalystX-Profile/ (timeout 10 seconds)
perl-CatalystX-Profile.src: I: checking-url
http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/J/JJ/JJNAPIORK/CatalystX-Profile-0.02.tar.gz
(timeout 10 seconds)
perl-CatalystX-Profile.spec: I: checking-url
http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/J/JJ/JJNAPIORK/CatalystX-Profile-0.02.tar.gz
(timeout 10 seconds)
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
Some ignoreable spelling errors.
-
key:
[+] OK
[.] OK, not applicable
[X] needs work
-
[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}.
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license.
GPL+ or Artistic
[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[+] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must
be included in %doc.
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source.
$ md5sum *
708ab56ebf8707c1668b1a48f3518c2f CatalystX-Profile-0.02.tar.gz
708ab56ebf8707c1668b1a48f3518c2f CatalystX-Profile-0.02.tar.gz.packaged
[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
- Succesful Koji build available.
[.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, ...
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
[.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
[.] MUST: If a package installs files below %{_datadir}/icons, the icon cache
must be updated.
[.] MUST: Packages storing shared library files (not just symlinks) must call
ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[.] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, ...
[+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates.
[+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in %files.
[+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.
[+] MUST: Packages must not provide RPM dependency information when that
information is not global in nature, or are otherwise handled.
[.] MUST: When filtering automatically generated RPM dependency information,
the filtering system implemented by Fedora must be used.
[+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
[+] MUST: Files in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application.
[.] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[.] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), ...
[.] MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned
dependency.
[.] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
[.] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file
[.] MUST: .desktop
[Bug 742560] Review Request: perl-CatalystX-SimpleLogin - Provide a simple Login controller which can be reused
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=742560
Mario Blättermann mari...@freenet.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||mari...@freenet.de
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mari...@freenet.de
Flag||fedora-review+
Bug 742560 depends on bug 742552, which changed state.
Bug 742552 Summary: Review Request: perl-CatalystX-InjectComponent - Inject
components into your Catalyst application
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=742552
What|Old Value |New Value
Resolution||ERRATA
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Bug 742560 depends on bug 742542, which changed state.
Bug 742542 Summary: Review Request: perl-Catalyst-ActionRole-ACL - User
role-based authorization action class
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=742542
What|Old Value |New Value
Resolution||ERRATA
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Bug 742560 depends on bug 742545, which changed state.
Bug 742545 Summary: Review Request: perl-MooseX-RelatedClassRoles - Apply roles
to a class related to yours
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=742545
What|Old Value |New Value
Resolution||ERRATA
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
--- Comment #2 from Mario Blättermann mari...@freenet.de 2011-10-11 14:49:27
EDT ---
$ rpmlint -i -v *perl-CatalystX-SimpleLogin.noarch: I: checking
perl-CatalystX-SimpleLogin.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US
login - loin, logic, lo gin
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
perl-CatalystX-SimpleLogin.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US
logout - lo gout, lo-gout, log out
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
perl-CatalystX-SimpleLogin.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US
adition - addition, audition, edition
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
perl-CatalystX-SimpleLogin.noarch: I: checking-url
http://search.cpan.org/dist/CatalystX-SimpleLogin/ (timeout 10 seconds)
perl-CatalystX-SimpleLogin.src: I: checking
perl-CatalystX-SimpleLogin.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US login
- loin, logic, lo gin
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
perl-CatalystX-SimpleLogin.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US logout
- lo gout, lo-gout, log out
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
perl-CatalystX-SimpleLogin.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US adition
- addition, audition, edition
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
perl-CatalystX-SimpleLogin.src: I: checking-url
http://search.cpan.org/dist/CatalystX-SimpleLogin/ (timeout 10 seconds)
perl-CatalystX-SimpleLogin.src: I: checking-url
http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/B/BO/BOBTFISH/CatalystX-SimpleLogin-0.15.tar.gz
(timeout 10 seconds)
perl-CatalystX-SimpleLogin.spec: I: checking-url
http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/B/BO/BOBTFISH/CatalystX-SimpleLogin-0.15.tar.gz
(timeout 10 seconds)
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings.
False positive spelling errors mostly, the one which could be tweaked is
adition.
-
key:
[+] OK
[.] OK, not applicable
[X] needs work
-
[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}.
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license.
GPL+ or Artistic
[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[.] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must
be included in %doc.
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source.
$ md5sum *
1ed6869bb214f012c8594f8096d528f4 CatalystX-SimpleLogin-0.15.tar.gz
1ed6869bb214f012c8594f8096d528f4
CatalystX-SimpleLogin-0.15.tar.gz.packaged
[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary
[Bug 742996] Review Request: libpwquality - A library for password generation and password quality checking
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=742996 Miloslav Trmač m...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Miloslav Trmač m...@redhat.com 2011-10-11 14:50:22 EDT --- Thanks, accepted. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 745219] Review Request: rvm - C library for unstructured recoverable virtual memory
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=745219
Kashyap Chamarthy kcham...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kcham...@redhat.com
--- Comment #1 from Kashyap Chamarthy kcham...@redhat.com 2011-10-11 15:03:45
EDT ---
rpmlint was very clean.
===
build@~/rpmbuild/SOURCES - rpmlint ../SPECS/rvm.spec
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
build@~/rpmbuild/SOURCES -
===
here is my review:
OK - %{?dist} tag is used in release
OK - The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
OK - The spec file name must match the base package %{name}
OK - The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines
OK - The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and
meet the Licensing Guidelines (license is LGPLv2)
NA - Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files must
call ldconfig in %post and %postun
OK - The package MUST successfully compile and build
koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3423707
OK - The spec file must be written in American English.
OK - The spec file for the package MUST be legible
OK - The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
build@~/rpmbuild/SOURCES - gpg rvm-1.17.tar.gz.asc
gpg: Signature made Wed 24 Mar 2010 12:08:17 AM IST using DSA key ID 997007A2
gpg: Good signature from Jan Harkes jahar...@cs.cmu.edu
gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
gpg: There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner.
Primary key fingerprint: 477F 78AA 863A 90A6 2366 4AA1 CE0D 7E10 9970 07A2
OK - A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings
OK - Permissions on files must be set properly
OK - Each package must have a %clean section
OK - Each package must consistently use macros
OK - The package must contain code, or permissible content
OK - Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage -- No large
documentation
OK - If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of
the application
OK - Header files must be in a -devel package -- no devel package
NA - Static libraries must be in a -static package -- no static package
NA - Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'
OK - Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives
OK - No file conflicts with other packages and no general names.
OK - All file names in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8
OK - The package does not yet exist in Fedora. The Review Request is not a
duplicate.
I didn't install and try the (successful)scratch build of rvm(and it's sub
pkgs) http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3423708 as there are
some missing deps (lwp and lwp devel) -- the other two pkgs you needed. I see
they're submitted for 'Package Change Request'
Looks good. [I hope I didn't miss anything, I don't perform reviews as often].
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.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 742996] Review Request: libpwquality - A library for password generation and password quality checking
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=742996 Tomas Mraz tm...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Tomas Mraz tm...@redhat.com 2011-10-11 15:18:49 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: libpwquality Short Description: A library for password generation and password quality checking Owners: tmraz Branches: f16 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 744430] Review Request: libquvi-scripts - Embedded lua scripts that libquvi uses for parsing the media details
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=744430 --- Comment #6 from Nicoleau Fabien nicoleau.fab...@gmail.com 2011-10-11 15:22:47 EDT --- Update : Spec URL: http://rpms.nicoleau-fabien.net/SPECS/libquvi-scripts.spec SRPM URL: http://rpms.nicoleau-fabien.net/SRPMS/libquvi-scripts-0.4.0-3.fc15.src.rpm Changelog : - Remove the devel subpackage - The package is now noarch rpmlint output : [builder@FEDORABOX rpmbuild]$ rpmlint /home/builder/rpmbuild/SRPMS/libquvi-scripts-0.4.0-3.fc15.src.rpm /home/builder/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/libquvi-scripts-0.4.0-3.fc15.noarch.rpm libquvi-scripts.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) lua - la, luau, lea libquvi-scripts.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US lua - la, luau, lea libquvi-scripts.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/share/pkgconfig/libquvi-scripts.pc 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 739416] Review Request: php-php-gettext - Gettext emulation 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=739416 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|php-php-gettext-1.0.11-3.fc |php-php-gettext-1.0.11-3.el |14 |6 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-10-11 15:26:15 EDT --- php-php-gettext-1.0.11-3.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 683127] Review Request: tpm-quote-tools - TPM-based attestation using the TPM quote operation (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=683127 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|tpm-quote-tools-1.0.1-1.fc1 |tpm-quote-tools-1.0.1-1.el6 |5 | --- Comment #46 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-10-11 15:27:20 EDT --- tpm-quote-tools-1.0.1-1.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 693761] Review Request: php-Kohana - The Swift PHP 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=693761 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|php-Kohana-2.4-1.rc2.fc15 |php-Kohana-2.4-1.rc2.el6 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-10-11 15:26:39 EDT --- php-Kohana-2.4-1.rc2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 739416] Review Request: php-php-gettext - Gettext emulation 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=739416 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|php-php-gettext-1.0.11-3.el |php-php-gettext-1.0.11-3.el |6 |5 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-10-11 15:27:01 EDT --- php-php-gettext-1.0.11-3.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 744433] Review Request: libquvi - A cross-platform library for parsing flash media stream
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=744433 --- Comment #2 from Nicoleau Fabien nicoleau.fab...@gmail.com 2011-10-11 15:24:34 EDT --- Update : Spec URL: http://rpms.nicoleau-fabien.net/SPECS/libquvi.spec SRPM URL: http://rpms.nicoleau-fabien.net/SRPMS/libquvi-0.4.0-3.fc15.src.rpm Changelog : - Fix builrequires rpmlint output : [builder@FEDORABOX rpmbuild]$ rpmlint /home/builder/rpmbuild/SRPMS/libquvi-0.4.0-3.fc15.src.rpm /home/builder/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/libquvi-0.4.0-3.fc15.x86_64.rpm /home/builder/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/libquvi-devel-0.4.0-3.fc15.x86_64.rpm /home/builder/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/libquvi-debuginfo-0.4.0-3.fc15.x86_64.rpm libquvi.x86_64: E: explicit-lib-dependency libquvi-scripts 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 742996] Review Request: libpwquality - A library for password generation and password quality checking
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=742996 --- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2011-10-11 15:40:06 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 745219] Review Request: rvm - C library for unstructured recoverable virtual memory
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=745219 Kashyap Chamarthy kcham...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Kashyap Chamarthy kcham...@redhat.com 2011-10-11 16:02:19 EDT --- Flipped the review flag to + -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 702143] Review Request: wallaby - configuration service for Condor pools
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=702143 --- Comment #8 from Will Benton wi...@redhat.com 2011-10-11 16:39:34 EDT --- Tom, thanks again for the review. I've posted an updated package here: http://packages.getwallaby.com/wallaby-0.11.0-3.fc14.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 744948] Review Request: ubuntu-mono-icon-theme - Ubuntu Mono icon theme
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=744948 --- Comment #3 from Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2...@gmail.com 2011-10-11 17:15:06 EDT --- Thanks Tom for your advice. I'm thinking about renaming the package simply « mono-icon-theme ». I haven't found icon themes (especially on GNOME/KDE Look) with such a name, I hope it's OK like this. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 717337] Review Request: URCU - Userspace RCU Implementation
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=717337 --- Comment #10 from Yannick Brosseau yannick.bross...@gmail.com 2011-10-11 17:16:34 EDT --- Here is the updated version following your comments. Including the new release. http://www.dorsal.polymtl.ca/~ybrosseau/fedora/SPECS/liburcu.spec http://www.dorsal.polymtl.ca/~ybrosseau/fedora/SRPMS/liburcu-0.6.5-1.fc15.src.rpm The exits call are still present, but they should be fixed in the next upstream release. I've decided to put back the sed to fix the rpath as they seems less risky. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 744948] Review Request: ubuntu-mono-icon-theme - Ubuntu Mono icon theme
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=744948 --- Comment #4 from Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2...@gmail.com 2011-10-11 17:29:33 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) * It must be renamed to not use the Ubuntu or Canonical trademarks. I was rethinking about this point. What about all the google-* packages in the repos? Isn't Google a TM? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 744948] Review Request: ubuntu-mono-icon-theme - Ubuntu Mono icon theme
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=744948 --- Comment #5 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2011-10-11 17:59:00 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) (In reply to comment #2) * It must be renamed to not use the Ubuntu or Canonical trademarks. I was rethinking about this point. What about all the google-* packages in the repos? Isn't Google a TM? It is, but in those cases, it has nothing to do with the look or feel of Google, and also, Google is not a Linux distribution. This is an area where we need to be especially careful. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 690025] Review Request: cminpack - Solver for nonlinear equations and nonlinear least squares problems
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=690025
Tim Niemueller t...@niemueller.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Tim Niemueller t...@niemueller.de 2011-10-11 17:56:20 EDT
---
REVIEW:
Legend: + = PASSED, - = FAILED, 0 = Not Applicable
+ rpmlint is silent
+ The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
+ The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
+ The package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
+ The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
Licensing Guidelines.
+ The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license (BSD).
+ The file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package, is included
in %doc.
+ The spec file is written in American English.
+ The spec file for the package is legible.
+ The sources used to build the package, match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
#sha256sum ~/Downloads/cminpack-1.1.3.tar.gz
eb319ad3eeb9e54076b2ac484058540dbd5db4a45928302a5fd1469aad5d4467
#sha256sum SOURCES/cminpack-1.1.3.tar.gz
eb319ad3eeb9e54076b2ac484058540dbd5db4a45928302a5fd1469aad5d4467
+ The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
primary architecture.
+ All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
0 No need to handle locales.
+ Main package calls ldconfig in %post/%postun
+ The package does NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
+ The package is not designed to be relocatable.
+ The package owns all directories that it creates.
+ The package does not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files
listings.
+ Permissions on files are set properly.
+ The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
+ The package consistently uses macros.
+ The package contains code, or permissible content.
+ No extremely large documentation files.
+ Anything, the package includes as %doc, does not affect the runtime of the
application.
+ Header files are in -devel package
0 Static libraries are in -static package
+ pkg-config files are in -devel package
+ .so (no suffix) are in -devel package
+ -devel package requires base package, -static package requires -devel package
+ The package does NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
0 Not a GUI application.
+ The package does not own files or directories already owned by other packages
+ At the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
+ All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8.
Excellent package, using it for months now (sorry for the really long delay),
no flaws in the spec and packaging.
APPROVED
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 744948] Review Request: ubuntu-mono-icon-theme - Ubuntu Mono icon theme
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=744948 --- Comment #6 from Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2...@gmail.com 2011-10-11 18:01:17 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) It is, but in those cases, it has nothing to do with the look or feel of Google, and also, Google is not a Linux distribution. This is an area where we need to be especially careful. Thanks for this clarification. I will submit very soon a « clean » package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 720857] Review Request: datalog - A Lightweight Deductive Database using Datalog
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=720857 Tim Niemueller t...@niemueller.de changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 720857] Review Request: datalog - A Lightweight Deductive Database using Datalog
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=720857 --- Comment #15 from Tim Niemueller t...@niemueller.de 2011-10-11 18:08:22 EDT --- Hi John. Nice work on the package, a few minor things and we'll go for the review. Had a look at the package, here are some remarks and things that need to be fixed: - datalog IS the right name (Lua is an implementation detail, it is not a Lua module) - You need to create a -devel sub-package to package header and .so (no suffix) files (.so.0.0.0 stays in the main package). - write the full sourceforge URL (not sf.net) - remove the Packager field - Can you relax the build requirement? If there was a 5.1.5 it wouldn't build anymore, but that version would only have minor changes. If you feel that it is likely to need some work keep it as is. - define the luapkgdir at the top of the file - remove the newline between %description and the text -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 711893] Review Request: rubygem-dnsruby - Ruby DNS(SEC) implementation
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=711893 --- Comment #14 from Paul Wouters p...@xelerance.com 2011-10-11 18:13:15 EDT --- I thought i had set it before, but it got eaten? I've set it 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 711893] Review Request: rubygem-dnsruby - Ruby DNS(SEC) implementation
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=711893 Paul Wouters p...@xelerance.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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 489803] Review Request: libserial - C++ library to access serial ports on POSIX systems
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=489803 --- Comment #21 from Tim Niemueller t...@niemueller.de 2011-10-11 18:34:07 EDT --- Poke the maintainer 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 745291] New: Review Request: drupal7-active_tags - adds a taxonomy widget with a new jQuery enabled tag entry widget
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: drupal7-active_tags - adds a taxonomy widget with a new jQuery enabled tag entry widget https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=745291 Summary: Review Request: drupal7-active_tags - adds a taxonomy widget with a new jQuery enabled tag entry widget Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: sdod...@sdodson.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- SPEC : http://sdodson.fedorapeople.org/drupal7-active_tags.spec SRPM : http://sdodson.fedorapeople.org/drupal7-active_tags-2.0-0.1.dev.fc15.src.rpm Description : Active Tags is a pure JavaScript widget for changing how users enter taxonomy terms by piggy backing onto taxonomy modules, such as Taxonomy and/or Content Taxonomy. This keeps Active Tags simple and small. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 687987] Review Request: plymouth-theme-hot-dog - Plymouth Happy Hot Dog Theme
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=687987 --- Comment #11 from Christoph Wickert cwick...@fedoraproject.org 2011-10-11 18:55:24 EDT --- FYI: According to http://darkmattermatters.com/2011/10/11/the-origins-of-the-beefy-miracle beefy miracle was created by Kyle Hoyt. http://www.stationzero.org/kylehoyt/ David, can we continue with this? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 744944] Review Request: humanity-icon-theme - Humanity icon theme
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=744944 --- Comment #3 from Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2...@gmail.com 2011-10-11 19:04:50 EDT --- A few fixes: Spec URL: http://melmorabity.fedorapeople.org/packages/humanity-icon-theme/humanity-icon-theme.spec SRPM URL: http://melmorabity.fedorapeople.org/packages/humanity-icon-theme/humanity-icon-theme-0.5.3.11-2.fc16.src.rpm The package doesn't depend on fedora-logos anymore: - probably a too strict dependency for those who don't/can't have fedora-logos installed (cf generic-logos) - the theme inherits from gnome-icon-themes which provides its own distributor logos; by the way, the Fedora logo isn't visible on a GNOME 3 desktop session. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 745293] New: review Request: drupal7-cck cck allows you to add custom fields to nodes using a web browser
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: review Request: drupal7-cck cck allows you to add custom fields to nodes using a web browser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=745293 Summary: review Request: drupal7-cck cck allows you to add custom fields to nodes using a web browser Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: sdod...@sdodson.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- SPEC : http://sdodson.fedorapeople.org/drupal7-cck.spec SRPM : http://sdodson.fedorapeople.org/drupal7-cck-2-0.1.dev.fc15.src.rpm Description : The Content Construction Kit allows you to add custom fields to nodes using a web browser. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 745295] New: Review Request: drupal7-chosen - Uses the Chosen jQuery plugin to make your elements more user-friendly
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: drupal7-chosen - Uses the Chosen jQuery plugin to make your elements more user-friendly https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=745295 Summary: Review Request: drupal7-chosen - Uses the Chosen jQuery plugin to make your elements more user-friendly Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: sdod...@sdodson.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- SPEC : http://sdodson.fedorapeople.org/drupal7-chosen.spec SRPM : http://sdodson.fedorapeople.org/drupal7-chosen-1.0-1.fc15.src.rpm Description : Chosen uses the Chosen jQuery plugin to make your select elements more user-friendly. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 745296] New: Review Request: drupal7-context - Allows you to manage contextual conditions and reactions of your site
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: drupal7-context - Allows you to manage contextual conditions and reactions of your site https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=745296 Summary: Review Request: drupal7-context - Allows you to manage contextual conditions and reactions of your site Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: sdod...@sdodson.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- SPEC : http://sdodson.fedorapeople.org/drupal7-context.spec SRPM : http://sdodson.fedorapeople.org/drupal7-context-3.0-0.1.beta1.fc15.src.rpm Description: Context allows you to manage contextual conditions and reactions for different portions of your site. You can think of each context as representing a section of your site. For each context, you can choose the conditions that trigger this context to be active and choose different aspects of Drupal that should react to this active context. Think of conditions as a set of rules that are checked during page load to see what context is active. Any reactions that are associated with active contexts are then fired. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 745216] Review Request: lwp - C library for user-mode threading
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=745216
--- Comment #4 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com 2011-10-11 19:25:11
EDT ---
You could add
Source1: http://www.coda.cs.cmu.edu/pub/lwp/src/lwp-2.6.tar.gz.asc
Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Requiring_Base_Package
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 713990] Review Request: bzr-fastimport - Bzr plugin for fast loading of data from other VCS 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=713990 --- Comment #12 from Dan Callaghan dcall...@redhat.com 2011-10-11 19:40:39 EDT --- (In reply to comment #11) Updated: http://fedorapeople.org/~dcallagh/bzr-fastimport/bzr-fastimport.spec http://repos.fedorapeople.org/repos/dcallagh/bzr-fastimport/fedora-15/SRPMS/bzr-fastimport-0.11.0-2.fc15.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 744948] Review Request: ubuntu-mono-icon-theme - Ubuntu Mono icon theme
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=744948 --- Comment #8 from Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2...@gmail.com 2011-10-11 19:46:49 EDT --- (I forgot to mention that the package has been renamed to mono-icon-theme). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 744952] Review Request: light-theme-gnome - Light Themes (Ambiance and Radiance)
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=744952 --- Comment #1 from Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2...@gmail.com 2011-10-11 19:48:38 EDT --- Fix the dependency on the Mono icons, since the corresponding package was renamed (see #744948): Spec URL: http://melmorabity.fedorapeople.org/packages/light-theme-gnome/light-theme-gnome.spec SRPM URL: http://melmorabity.fedorapeople.org/packages/light-theme-gnome/light-theme-gnome-0.1.8.25-2.fc16.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 744948] Review Request: ubuntu-mono-icon-theme - Ubuntu Mono icon theme
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=744948 --- Comment #7 from Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2...@gmail.com 2011-10-11 19:45:35 EDT --- Spec URL: http://melmorabity.fedorapeople.org/packages/mono-icon-theme/mono-icon-theme.spec SRPM URL: http://melmorabity.fedorapeople.org/packages/mono-icon-theme/mono-icon-theme-0.0.37-2.fc16.src.rpm I've also removed the dependency on fedora-logos and the Ubuntu logos substitution by the Fedora ones: - depending on fedora-logos is probably too strict for those who don't/can't have fedora-logos installed (cf generic-logos) - the theme inherits from gnome-icon-themes which provides its own distributor logos; by the way, the Fedora logo isn't visible on a GNOME 3 desktop session. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 745305] New: Review Request: drupal7-entity - Extends the entity API to provide a unified way to deal with entities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: drupal7-entity - Extends the entity API to provide a unified way to deal with entities https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=745305 Summary: Review Request: drupal7-entity - Extends the entity API to provide a unified way to deal with entities Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: sdod...@sdodson.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- SPEC : http://sdodson.fedorapeople.org/drupal7-entity.spec SRPM : http://sdodson.fedorapeople.org/drupal7-entity-1.0-0.1.beta10.fc15.noarch.rpm Description: This module extends the entity API of Drupal core in order to provide a unified way to deal with entities and their properties. Additionally, it provides an entity CRUD controller, which helps simplifying the creation of new entity types. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 745306] New: Review Request: drupal7-eva - Eva allows the output of a View to be attached to content of entities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: drupal7-eva - Eva allows the output of a View to be attached to content of entities https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=745306 Summary: Review Request: drupal7-eva - Eva allows the output of a View to be attached to content of entities Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: sdod...@sdodson.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- SPEC : http://sdodson.fedorapeople.org/drupal7-eva.spec SRPM : http://sdodson.fedorapeople.org/drupal7-eva-1.1-1.fc15.src.rpm Description : Eva is short for Entity Views Attachment; it provides a Views display plugin that allows the output of a View to be attached to the content of any Drupal entity. The body of a node or comment, the profile of a user account, or the listing page for a Taxonomy term are all examples of entity content. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 730314] Review Request: jboss-invocation - JBoss Invocation 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=730314 Richard Fontana rfont...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rfont...@redhat.com Blocks||182235(FE-Legal) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
