[Bug 1147013] Review Request: proxychains-ng - Redirect connections through proxy servers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1147013 --- Comment #52 from Mamoru TASAKA --- I have some unclarified issues with the code so I mailed to the authority. Please wait for a few days... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 817278] Review Request: jdiff - An HTML Report of API Differences
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817278 gil cattaneo changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs+ | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 957337] Review Request: jtoaster - Java utility class for swing applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=957337 gil cattaneo changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 957337] Review Request: jtoaster - Java utility class for swing applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=957337 --- Comment #12 from gil cattaneo --- I don't want maintains packages for EPEL, please use your FAS name -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 817278] Review Request: jdiff - An HTML Report of API Differences
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817278 --- Comment #11 from gil cattaneo --- I don't want maintains packages for EPEL, please use your FAS name -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1177055] Tracker mesos - Cluster Manager to epel7
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1177055 Timothy St. Clair changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On|817278 | Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817278 [Bug 817278] Review Request: jdiff - An HTML Report of API Differences -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 817278] Review Request: jdiff - An HTML Report of API Differences
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817278 Timothy St. Clair changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|1177055 | Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #10 from Timothy St. Clair --- retract, it's part of EL7, but for some reason my mock builds were failing. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1177055 [Bug 1177055] Tracker mesos - Cluster Manager to epel7 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1177055] Tracker mesos - Cluster Manager to epel7
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1177055 Timothy St. Clair changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||817278 --- Comment #11 from Timothy St. Clair --- Uncertain why checkstyle fails on an epel rebuild as it's part of EL. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817278 [Bug 817278] Review Request: jdiff - An HTML Report of API Differences -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 817278] Review Request: jdiff - An HTML Report of API Differences
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817278 Timothy St. Clair changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1177055 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1177055 [Bug 1177055] Tracker mesos - Cluster Manager to epel7 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 817278] Review Request: jdiff - An HTML Report of API Differences
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817278 Timothy St. Clair changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tstcl...@redhat.com Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #9 from Timothy St. Clair --- Package Change Request == Package Name: jdiff New Branches: epel7 Owners: gil InitialCC: java-sig -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1177055] Tracker mesos - Cluster Manager to epel7
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1177055 Timothy St. Clair changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|(mesos) Review Request: |Tracker mesos - Cluster |mesos - Cluster Manager |Manager to epel7 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1177055] (mesos) Review Request: mesos - Cluster Manager
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1177055 Timothy St. Clair changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||957337 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=957337 [Bug 957337] Review Request: jtoaster - Java utility class for swing applications -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 957337] Review Request: jtoaster - Java utility class for swing applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=957337 Timothy St. Clair changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1177055 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1177055 [Bug 1177055] (mesos) Review Request: mesos - Cluster Manager -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 957337] Review Request: jtoaster - Java utility class for swing applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=957337 Timothy St. Clair changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tstcl...@redhat.com Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #11 from Timothy St. Clair --- Package Change Request == Package Name: jtoaster New Branches: epel7 Owners: gil InitialCC: java-sig -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1177055] (mesos) Review Request: mesos - Cluster Manager
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1177055 Timothy St. Clair changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|tstcl...@redhat.com --- Comment #10 from Timothy St. Clair --- Current missing dep-graph for zk rebuild on epel7: Error: No Package found for checkstyle Error: No Package found for ivy-local Error: No Package found for jdiff Error: No Package found for jtoaster Error: No Package found for netty -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1191498] Review Request: safelease - Legacy locking utility for VDSM
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1191498 --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System --- safelease-1.0-4.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1189015] Review Request: python-MDAnalysis - Analyze and manipulate molecular dynamics trajectories
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1189015 --- Comment #4 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski --- Thanks for the review, Antonio. Regarding the bundled xdrfile2, I have opened a discussion[1] with xdrfile upstream to include MDAnalysis changes. At the moment, there are no consumers of xdrfile in Fedora as far as I can tell, so if upstream accepts the changes, I should be able to simply patch MDAnalysis to use system xdrfile. I'm not able to reproduce the rpmlint permission issues. Docs were not packaged, but I'll add them to a -doc subpackage. [1] https://mailman-1.sys.kth.se/pipermail/gromacs.org_gmx-developers/2015-May/008300.html -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1218368] Review Request: python-django-fas - Django auth backend for FAS (Fedora Accounts System)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1218368 Jakub Dorňák changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Jakub Dorňák --- fix fedora-cvs flag -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 810376] Review Request: python-pypng - Python PNG encoder/decoder
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810376 --- Comment #23 from Matthew Miller --- Oh hi. Thanks for the ping. (png? hmm.) Updated to newest upstream version: Spec URL: http://mattdm.org/misc/fedora/python-pypng.spec SRPM URL: http://mattdm.org/misc/fedora/python-pypng-0.0.17-1.fc22.mattdm.src.rpm What is the correct thing to do with python3 at this point? The readme notes PyPNG also works on Python 3.x if you use the 2to3 tool which it should do automatically (this support is very recent, and preliminary). I assume that should be done and a python3 subpackage created? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1219948] Review Request: ardour2 - Digital Audio Workstation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219948 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1219948] Review Request: ardour2 - Digital Audio Workstation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219948 --- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1219948] Review Request: ardour2 - Digital Audio Workstation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219948 Nils Philippsen changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Nils Philippsen --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: ardour2 Short Description: Digital Audio Workstation Upstream URL: http://ardour.org Owners: nphilipp Branches: f21 f22 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1219948] Review Request: ardour2 - Digital Audio Workstation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219948 --- Comment #3 from Nils Philippsen --- Rpmlint probably doesn't know about the extension ".script" and doesn't like the file being made executable. I'll rename the file to ardour.sh and trim the description a bit before building. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1197605] Review Request: python-django-rest-framework - Web APIs for Django, made easy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197605 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System --- python-django-rest-framework-3.1.1-3.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 testing repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1208835] Re-Review Request: gdouros-akkadian-fonts - A font for Sumero-Akkadian cuneiform
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208835 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||gdouros-akkadian-fonts-7.13 ||-0.2.20150430.fc22 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2015-05-11 15:07:18 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System --- gdouros-akkadian-fonts-7.13-0.2.20150430.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1208840] Re-Review Request: gdouros-musica-fonts - A font for musical symbols
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208840 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||gdouros-musica-fonts-3.12-0 ||.2.20150430.fc22 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2015-05-11 15:06:53 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- gdouros-musica-fonts-3.12-0.2.20150430.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1208838] Re-Review Request: gdouros-alexander-fonts - A Greek typeface inspired by Alexander Wilson
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208838 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||gdouros-alexander-fonts-5.0 ||1-0.2.20150430.fc22 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2015-05-11 15:04:59 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- gdouros-alexander-fonts-5.01-0.2.20150430.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1193531] Review Request: php-phpspec - Specification-oriented BDD framework for PHP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193531 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||php-phpspec-2.2.0-1.fc22 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2015-05-11 15:03:37 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- php-phpspec-2.2.0-1.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1208839] Re-Review Request: gdouros-analecta-fonts - An ecclesiastic scripts font
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208839 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||gdouros-analecta-fonts-4.02 ||-0.2.20150430.fc22 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2015-05-11 15:02:15 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- gdouros-analecta-fonts-4.02-0.2.20150430.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1212157] Review Request: plotnetcfg - A tool to plot network configuration
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1212157 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||plotnetcfg-0.3-1.fc22 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2015-05-11 15:02:01 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System --- plotnetcfg-0.3-1.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1220508] Review Request: nodejs-string - Enhancements to the vanilla JavasScript string
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1220508 Ralph Bean changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1220084 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1220084 [Bug 1220084] nodejs-yargs impossible to install due to missing dependencies -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1220132] Review Request: perl-URI-ws - WebSocket support for URI package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1220132 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1220132] Review Request: perl-URI-ws - WebSocket support for URI package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1220132 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1220131] Review Request: perl-Test-Deep-Type - Test::Deep plugin for validating type constraints
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1220131 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla --- WARNING: Requested package name perl-Test-Deep-type doesn't match bug summary perl-Test-Deep-Type -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1220131] Review Request: perl-Test-Deep-Type - Test::Deep plugin for validating type constraints
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1220131 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1218090] Review Request: php-seld-phar-utils - PHAR file format utilities
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1218090 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1218090] Review Request: php-seld-phar-utils - PHAR file format utilities
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1218090 --- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1218089] Review Request: php-seld-cli-prompt - Allows you to prompt for user input on the command line
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1218089 --- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1218089] Review Request: php-seld-cli-prompt - Allows you to prompt for user input on the command line
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1218089 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1153023] Review Request: jenkins-antisamy-markup-formatter-plugin - OWASP Markup Formatter Plugin for Jenkins
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1153023 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1192059] Review Request: gtk-sharp3 - GTK 3 sharp for Mono
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1192059 --- Comment #14 from Claudio Rodrigo Pereyra DIaz --- Fix(In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #13) > Right, package looks OK. One question: > how is the virtual Provides:libmono-profiler-gui-thread-check supposed to be > used? > > Can't sponsor you, sorry. I'd suggest heading over to > http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/ and doing some reviews in > "trivial" or "new" categories. Removed, this was for problem with rpm that not detected the provides lib requiered by monodevelop, but this was fixed and now I removed form spec. Thank -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1220508] New: Review Request: nodejs-string - Enhancements to the vanilla JavasScript string
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1220508 Bug ID: 1220508 Summary: Review Request: nodejs-string - Enhancements to the vanilla JavasScript string Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: rb...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://ralph.fedorapeople.org//nodejs-string.spec SRPM URL: http://ralph.fedorapeople.org//nodejs-string-3.1.1-1.fc21.src.rpm Description: string contains methods that aren't included in the vanilla JavaScript string such as escaping html, decoding html entities, stripping tags, etc -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1220491] New: Review Request: elastic-curator - Tools for managing Elasticsearch indices
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1220491 Bug ID: 1220491 Summary: Review Request: elastic-curator - Tools for managing Elasticsearch indices Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: piotr1...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://piotrp.fedorapeople.org/elastic-curator.spec SRPM URL: https://piotrp.fedorapeople.org/elastic-curator-3.0.3-1.fc21.src.rpm Description: Tools for managing Elasticsearch indices Fedora Account System Username: piotrp there already is a package called curator, therefore named elastic-curator. python-curator would not be correct as this is a tool, not a libarary -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1220342] Review Request: compat-libgdata19 - Compat package with libgdata libraries
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1220342
Pranav Kant changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pranav...@gmail.com
--- Comment #2 from Pranav Kant ---
This is an unofficial review only.
Couldn't find anything problematic.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
Issues:
===
No issues found.
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[-]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL).
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro.
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unles
[Bug 1214385] Review Request: jj2000 - A pure Java JPEG 2000 image codec
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1214385 gil cattaneo changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|1214376 | Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1214376 [Bug 1214376] thredds-4.6.0 is available -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1214385] Review Request: jj2000 - A pure Java JPEG 2000 image codec
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1214385 gil cattaneo changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NOTABUG Last Closed||2015-05-11 12:12:29 --- Comment #6 from gil cattaneo --- This library is NON free. Removed jj2000 support from the grib module. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1214385] Review Request: jj2000 - A pure Java JPEG 2000 image codec
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1214385 gil cattaneo changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|182235 (FE-Legal) | Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=182235 [Bug 182235] Fedora Legal Tracker -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1220451] Review Request: zuul - Trunk gating system developed for the OpenStack Project
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1220451 Tristan Cacqueray changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tdeca...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Tristan Cacqueray --- Hi Fabien, 1/ running fedora-review yeild this error: ERROR: 'mock build failed' And in the log: + /usr/bin/python setup.py build Traceback (most recent call last): File "setup.py", line 18, in import setuptools ImportError: No module named setuptools I suspect you need to add: BuildRequires: python-setuptools 2/ Also rpmlint raised a warning about W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 6, tab: line 5), you better use space everywhere and remove all tabulations. 3/ Finally, E: specfile-error warning: bogus date in %changelog Cheers! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1127967] Review Request: python-releases - A Sphinx extension for changelog manipulation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1127967 --- Comment #3 from Eduardo Mayorga --- Spec URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~mayorga/python-releases.spec SRPM URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~mayorga/python-releases-0.7.0-1.fc22.src.rpm It won't run the tests yet because they require the module invocations, which is not available in Fedora. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1129677] Review Request: gstreamer1-rtsp-server - gstreamer rtsp server version 1.x
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1129677 Nils Philippsen changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nphil...@redhat.com Flags||needinfo?(bjoern.esser@gmai ||l.com) --- Comment #20 from Nils Philippsen --- Is there anything I can help with? This blocks gnome-dvb-daemon-0.2.90 from Fedora 22, which makes the current Fedora 21 package (0.2.10-5.fc21) have a "newer" version/release than the one available in Fedora 22 (0.2.10-4.fc22). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1219948] Review Request: ardour2 - Digital Audio Workstation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219948
Brendan Jones changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Brendan Jones ---
No issues here other than the executable flag on the download script. this is
approved
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
Note: Using prebuilt packages
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s)
for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
"LGPL (v2.1 or later) (with incorrect FSF address)", "GPL (v2 or later)",
"Unknown or generated", "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "LGPL (v2 or later) (with
incorrect FSF address)", "LGPL (v2.1) (with incorrect FSF address)", "GPL
(v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address)", "*No copyright* LGPL (v2 or
later) (with incorrect FSF address)", "*No copyright* GPL (v2 or later)",
"LGPL (v2.1 or later)". 133 files have unknown license. Detailed output
of licensecheck in /tmp/ardour2/licensecheck.txt
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
Note: Using prebuilt rpms.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[-]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Test run failed
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
Note: Test run failed
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[!]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[-]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified.
[x]: SourceX tarball gener
[Bug 1182358] New package request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1182358 Jan Pokorný changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |ASSIGNED Depends On||1219572 --- Comment #20 from Jan Pokorný --- Moving back as [bug 1219572] should rather be fixed for 6.7. Hopefully nothing more than already set "blocker" flag is needed. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219572 [Bug 1219572] [ccs2pcs] mysql listen_address -> --bind-address quoting -- 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 1111433] Review Request: synthclone - A tool to create sample-based instruments
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=433 --- Comment #5 from Brian Monroe --- Thanks Kevin, Things have been a little nuts with traveling the last 3 weekends, but I'm hopeful to get to this tonight. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1220451] Review Request: zuul - Trunk gating system developed for the OpenStack Project
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1220451 Fabien Boucher changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1220451] New: Review Request: zuul - Trunk gating system developed for the OpenStack Project
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1220451 Bug ID: 1220451 Summary: Review Request: zuul - Trunk gating system developed for the OpenStack Project Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: fbouc...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://ca.enocloud.com:8080/v1/AUTH_b57314058a4e42dabffc8cde6ccbf2de/fedora-packaging/zuul.spec SRPM URL: https://ca.enocloud.com:8080/v1/AUTH_b57314058a4e42dabffc8cde6ccbf2de/fedora-packaging/zuul-2.0-0.20150421git135a935.fc21.src.rpm Description: This is a program that is used to gate the source code repository of a project so that changes are only merged if they pass tests. The main component is the scheduler. It receives events related to proposed changes, triggers tests based on those events, and reports back. This software interacts between Gerrit and Jenkins by listening the Gerrit events stream and triggering jobs. Fedora Account System Username: fbo I do not submit a Koji build log as currently the package cannot be built due to missing dependencies. The two missing has been submitted to review too: - python-gear: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1215046 - python-apscheduler: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1218410 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1220131] Review Request: perl-Test-Deep-Type - Test::Deep plugin for validating type constraints
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1220131 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Emmanuel Seyman --- (In reply to Jitka Plesnikova from comment #1) > > FIX: Please add BR perl(if), perl(overload), perl(strict) and > perl(warnings) Done. > TODO: You can add examples/ to the doc. Done. > APPROVED. Thank you, Jikta. Requesting SCM. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-Test-Deep-type Short Description: Test::Deep plugin for validating type constraints Upstream URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Test-Deep-Type/ Owners: eseyman Branches: f22 InitialCC: perl-sig -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1220132] Review Request: perl-URI-ws - WebSocket support for URI package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1220132 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Emmanuel Seyman --- (In reply to Petr Šabata from comment #1) > > You may use DESTDIR instead of PERL_INSTALL_ROOT. I'll do this before import. Thanks, Petr. Requesting SCM. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-URI-ws Short Description: WebSocket support for URI package Upstream URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/URI-ws/ Owners: eseyman Branches: f22 InitialCC: perl-sig -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1218090] Review Request: php-seld-phar-utils - PHAR file format utilities
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1218090 Remi Collet changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Remi Collet --- Can you please check, the package doesn't appears in pkgdb and $ fedpkg clone php-seld-phar-utils Clonage dans 'php-seld-phar-utils'... FATAL: R any php-seld-phar-utils remi DENIED by fallthru -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1218089] Review Request: php-seld-cli-prompt - Allows you to prompt for user input on the command line
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1218089 Remi Collet changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Remi Collet --- Can you please check, the package doesn't appears in pkgdb and $ fedpkg clone php-seld-cli-prompt Clonage dans 'php-seld-cli-prompt'... FATAL: R any php-seld-cli-prompt remi DENIED by fallthru -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1219970] Review Request: petera - Tool for binding data and disks to a network
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219970 Nathan Kinder changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nkin...@redhat.com |nob...@fedoraproject.org Flags|fedora-review? | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1214396] Review Request: jbzip2 - A Java bzip2 library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1214396 gil cattaneo changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|652183 (FE-JAVASIG) | Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652183 [Bug 652183] Java SIG tracker bug -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1214385] Review Request: jj2000 - A pure Java JPEG 2000 image codec
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1214385 gil cattaneo changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|652183 (FE-JAVASIG) | Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652183 [Bug 652183] Java SIG tracker bug -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1153023] Review Request: jenkins-antisamy-markup-formatter-plugin - OWASP Markup Formatter Plugin for Jenkins
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1153023 Michal Srb changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|652183 (FE-JAVASIG) | Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Michal Srb --- Thanks! New Package SCM Request === Package Name: jenkins-antisamy-markup-formatter-plugin Short Description: OWASP Markup Formatter Plugin for Jenkins Upstream URL: https://github.com/jenkinsci/antisamy-markup-formatter-plugin Owners: msrb mizdebsk msimacek Branches: f22 InitialCC: java-sig Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652183 [Bug 652183] Java SIG tracker bug -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1218090] Review Request: php-seld-phar-utils - PHAR file format utilities
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1218090 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1218090] Review Request: php-seld-phar-utils - PHAR file format utilities
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1218090 --- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1218089] Review Request: php-seld-cli-prompt - Allows you to prompt for user input on the command line
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1218089 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1218089] Review Request: php-seld-cli-prompt - Allows you to prompt for user input on the command line
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1218089 --- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1217857] Review Request: bandit - A framework for performing security analysis of Python source code
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1217857 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1220132] Review Request: perl-URI-ws - WebSocket support for URI package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1220132 Petr Šabata changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Petr Šabata --- You may use DESTDIR instead of PERL_INSTALL_ROOT. The rest is perfect, approving. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1217857] Review Request: bandit - A framework for performing security analysis of Python source code
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1217857 --- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1206946] Review Request: rubygem-occi-cli - Executable OCCI client
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1206946 --- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1206946] Review Request: rubygem-occi-cli - Executable OCCI client
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1206946 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1214385] Review Request: jj2000 - A pure Java JPEG 2000 image codec
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1214385 --- Comment #5 from gil cattaneo --- seem non free https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-legal-list/2008-December/msg4.html https://github.com/Unidata/jj2000/issues/5 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1220132] Review Request: perl-URI-ws - WebSocket support for URI package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1220132 Petr Šabata changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||psab...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|psab...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1214385] Review Request: jj2000 - A pure Java JPEG 2000 image codec
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1214385 gil cattaneo changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||182235 (FE-Legal) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=182235 [Bug 182235] Fedora Legal Tracker -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1218277] Review Request: mongo-tools - MongoDB tools
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1218277
gil cattaneo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #7 from gil cattaneo ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- 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.
Note: Cannot find LICENSE.md in rpm(s)
See:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text
IGNORE
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
Note: Using prebuilt packages
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
"BSD (3 clause)", "BSD (2 clause)", "Apache (v2.0)", "Unknown or
generated". 722 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
licensecheck in /home/gil/1218277-mongo-tools/review-mongo-
tools/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
Note: No known owner of /usr/share/licenses
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/licenses
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
Note: Using prebuilt rpms.
[-]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[-]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 2 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[!]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[?]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[?]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]:
[Bug 1214385] Review Request: jj2000 - A pure Java JPEG 2000 image codec
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1214385
--- Comment #4 from Marek Skalický ---
(In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #3)
> (In reply to Marek Skalický from comment #2)
> > Blocking:
> >
> > [!]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
> > - jj2000.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
> >
> > jj2000 should use %{_javadir} — /usr/share/java
> /usr/lib/java/jj2000.jar
> > ("Directory that holds all JAR files that do not contain or use native
> > code and do not depend on a particular Java standard version. JAR files can
> > either be placed directly in this directory or one of its subdirectories.
> > Often packages create their own subdirectories there, in this case
> > subdirectory name should match package name.")
> is not applicable for this library
> see
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:
> Java#Packaging_JAR_files_that_use_JNI
> this library use some classes for use/load native libraries
But I think these used classes should be in /usr/lib/java, not your class. I
haven't found it in packaging guidelines, but in my opinion JAR file use JNI
when it directly call native library.
I've looked into fedora how another packages do it and for example first what
I've found is dbus-java, which requires JNI package libmatthew-java, but still
use /usr/share/java.
I know it is not any proof, but we can ask on devel list.
> >
> > Non blocking:
> >
> > [!]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
> > file
> > from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
>
> > I also recommend to remove "This is a dependency for support of compression
> > in Grib2 files in
> > netCDF-java and TDS (https://github.com/Unidata/thredds).
> > " from description. Because in Fedora this package can be used by other
> > projects/programs too. But it is only my feeling...
>
> There are several projects that use a customized version of this library.
> This clarification should be understood that probably, this fork may not be
> suitable for other projects.
>
> Thanks!
OK.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1220342] Review Request: compat-libgdata19 - Compat package with libgdata libraries
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1220342 --- Comment #1 from Kalev Lember --- For reference, here's the diff to the current libgdata package: http://paste.fedoraproject.org/220605 I'd like to keep the diff to the original package down to the minimum in order to be able to easily share fixes when needed, so if possible please don't pick on the indentation and things like that that are also present in the original libgdata package. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9701782 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1220342] New: Review Request: compat-libgdata19 - Compat package with libgdata libraries
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1220342 Bug ID: 1220342 Summary: Review Request: compat-libgdata19 - Compat package with libgdata libraries Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: kalevlem...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://kalev.fedorapeople.org/compat-libgdata19.spec SRPM URL: https://kalev.fedorapeople.org/compat-libgdata19-0.16.1-1.fc22.src.rpm Description: This package is meant to go out together with libgdata 0.17.1 rebase that bumps its soname. Fedora Account System Username: kalev -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1218277] Review Request: mongo-tools - MongoDB tools
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1218277 --- Comment #6 from Marek Skalický --- (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #4) > NON blocking issues: > > [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. > Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: > "BSD (3 clause)", "BSD (2 clause)", "Apache (v2.0)", "Unknown or > generated". 719 files have unknown license. Detailed output of > licensecheck in /home/gil/1218277-mongo-tools/review-mongo- > tools/licensecheck.txt > You should install also BSD license > for e.g. > mongo-tools-r3.0.2/vendor/src/gopkg.in/tomb.v2/LICENSE Does someone know what packaging guidelines (mainly specific for Go language) says about this? Because under mongo-tools-r3.0.2/vendor directory there is 9 license files. And this is really lot to install... > > mongo-tools-r3.0.2/LICENSE.md is more similar to a "NOTICE" file > should have these contents http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.txt > > [!]: Latest version is packaged. see above Fixed. Spec URL: https://mskalick.fedorapeople.org/mongo-tools/mongo-tools.spec SRPM URL: https://mskalick.fedorapeople.org/mongo-tools/mongo-tools-3.0.3-1.fc20.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1214385] Review Request: jj2000 - A pure Java JPEG 2000 image codec
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1214385
--- Comment #3 from gil cattaneo ---
(In reply to Marek Skalický from comment #2)
> Blocking:
>
> [!]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
> - jj2000.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
>
> jj2000 should use %{_javadir} — /usr/share/java
/usr/lib/java/jj2000.jar
> ("Directory that holds all JAR files that do not contain or use native
> code and do not depend on a particular Java standard version. JAR files can
> either be placed directly in this directory or one of its subdirectories.
> Often packages create their own subdirectories there, in this case
> subdirectory name should match package name.")
is not applicable for this library
see
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#Packaging_JAR_files_that_use_JNI
this library use some classes for use/load native libraries
>
> Non blocking:
>
> [!]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
> file
> from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
> I also recommend to remove "This is a dependency for support of compression
> in Grib2 files in
> netCDF-java and TDS (https://github.com/Unidata/thredds).
> " from description. Because in Fedora this package can be used by other
> projects/programs too. But it is only my feeling...
There are several projects that use a customized version of this library. This
clarification should be understood that probably, this fork may not be suitable
for other projects.
Thanks!
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1214385] Review Request: jj2000 - A pure Java JPEG 2000 image codec
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1214385
--- Comment #2 from Marek Skalický ---
Blocking:
[!]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
- jj2000.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
jj2000 should use %{_javadir} — /usr/share/java
("Directory that holds all JAR files that do not contain or use native code
and do not depend on a particular Java standard version. JAR files can either
be placed directly in this directory or one of its subdirectories. Often
packages create their own subdirectories there, in this case subdirectory name
should match package name.")
Non blocking:
[!]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
I also recommend to remove "This is a dependency for support of compression in
Grib2 files in
netCDF-java and TDS (https://github.com/Unidata/thredds).
" from description. Because in Fedora this package can be used by other
projects/programs too. But it is only my feeling...
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1214385] Review Request: jj2000 - A pure Java JPEG 2000 image codec
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1214385
--- Comment #1 from Marek Skalický ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- 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.
Note: Cannot find COPYRIGHT in rpm(s)
See:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text
- This seems like a Java package, please install fedora-review-plugin-java to
get additional checks
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
"Unknown or generated". 224 files have unknown license. Detailed output
of licensecheck in /home/mskalick/1214385-jj2000/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
Note: No known owner of /usr/share/licenses, /usr/share/maven-metadata
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/licenses, /usr/share
/maven-metadata
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[!]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
Note: Test run failed
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Test run failed
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
Note: Test run failed
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
Java:
[x]: Bundled jar/class files should be removed before build
Note: Test run failed
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[!]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
jj2000-javadoc
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be
[Bug 1206946] Review Request: rubygem-occi-cli - Executable OCCI client
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1206946 František Dvořák changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from František Dvořák --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: rubygem-occi-cli Short Description: Executable OCCI client Upstream URL: https://github.com/EGI-FCTF/rOCCI-cli Owners: valtri Branches: f21 f22 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1220131] Review Request: perl-Test-Deep-Type - Test::Deep plugin for validating type constraints
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1220131 Jitka Plesnikova changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Jitka Plesnikova --- Source file is ok Summary is ok License is ok Description is ok URL and Source0 are ok All tests passed $ rpm -qp --requires perl-Test-Deep-Type-0.006-1.fc23.noarch.rpm | sort | uniq -c 1 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.20.2) 1 perl(Exporter) 1 perl(Safe::Isa) 1 perl(Scalar::Util) 1 perl(Test::Deep::Cmp) 1 perl(Try::Tiny) 1 perl(namespace::clean) 1 perl(parent) 1 perl(strict) 1 perl(warnings) 1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 Binary requires are Ok. $ rpm -qp --provides perl-Test-Deep-Type-0.006-1.fc23.noarch.rpm | sort | uniq -c 1 perl(Test::Deep::Type) = 0.006 1 perl-Test-Deep-Type = 0.006-1.fc23 Binary provides are Ok. $ rpmlint ./perl-Test-Deep-Type* perl-Test-Deep-Type.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US coderef -> code ref, code-ref, coder perl-Test-Deep-Type.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US bool -> biol, boil, book perl-Test-Deep-Type.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US coderef -> code ref, code-ref, coder perl-Test-Deep-Type.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US bool -> biol, boil, book 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. Rpmlint is ok FIX: Please add BR perl(if), perl(overload), perl(strict) and perl(warnings) TODO: You can add examples/ to the doc. Otherwise package is good. APPROVED. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1127967] Review Request: python-releases - A Sphinx extension for changelog manipulation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1127967 --- Comment #2 from Pierre-YvesChibon --- ping? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1218368] Review Request: python-django-fas - Django auth backend for FAS (Fedora Accounts System)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1218368 Jakub Dorňák changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #2 from Jakub Dorňák --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-django-fas Short Description: Django auth backend for FAS (Fedora Accounts System) Upstream URL: https://github.com/misli/django-fas/ Owners: jdornak Branches: f21 f22 el6 epel7 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1197126] Review Request: perl-Test-Run-CmdLine - Run TAP tests from command line using the Test::Run module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197126 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-Test-Run-CmdLine-0.012 ||6-1.fc23 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2015-05-11 04:17:17 --- Comment #4 from Petr Pisar --- Thank you for the review and the repository. I sub-packaged the examples, I added --interactive=never to the rm command, I moved the perl(Config) dependency to build section and I did not use the %__perl because it's a shell command not suitable for shellbang lines (e.g. it contains LD_LIBRARY_PATH variable settings in collections). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1197605] Review Request: python-django-rest-framework - Web APIs for Django, made easy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197605 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1197605] Review Request: python-django-rest-framework - Web APIs for Django, made easy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197605 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- python-django-rest-framework-3.1.1-3.fc22 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 22. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-django-rest-framework-3.1.1-3.fc22 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1218310] Review Request: fedora-user-agent-chrome - User-Agent Fedora branding for Google Chrome/Chromium browser
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1218310 Tomas Popela changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2015-05-11 03:37:43 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1220131] Review Request: perl-Test-Deep-Type - Test::Deep plugin for validating type constraints
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1220131 Jitka Plesnikova changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jples...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jples...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1218090] Review Request: php-seld-phar-utils - PHAR file format utilities
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1218090 Remi Collet changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Remi Collet --- Thanks for the review. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: php-seld-phar-utils Short Description: PHAR file format utilities Upstream URL: https://github.com/Seldaek/phar-utils Owners: remi Branches:f21 f22 epel7 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1218089] Review Request: php-seld-cli-prompt - Allows you to prompt for user input on the command line
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1218089 Remi Collet changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Remi Collet --- Thanks for the review. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: php-seld-cli-prompt Short Description: Allows you to prompt for user input on the command lin Upstream URL: https://github.com/Seldaek/cli-prompt Owners: remi Branches:f21 f22 epel7 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
