[Bug 1340269] Review Request: keepassx0 - Cross-platform password manager

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1340269



--- Comment #6 from Parag AN(पराग)  ---
I have tried to self-review this package and come up with following changes now
- Fix Exec key in desktop file to keepassx0
- Add license breakup
- Fix some English words spelling in %%description
- Honor the compiler flags
- Remove Obsolete Group tag

Also, I kept license tag just as "GPLv2 and BSD" as there is only one file in
GPLv2+ licensed.

SRPM:
https://pnemade.fedorapeople.org/fedora-work/keepassx0-0.4.4-3.fc24.src.rpm
SPEC: https://pnemade.fedorapeople.org/fedora-work/keepassx0.spec

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1094034] Review Request: reset-css - Eric Meyer' s reset style sheet for reducing browser inconsistencies

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1094034

Ben Rosser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||rosser@gmail.com



--- Comment #1 from Ben Rosser  ---
Still interested in packaging this? If you are, I'd be happy to 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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1336005] Review Request: gap-pkg-resclasses - Set-theoretic computations with Residue Classes

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1336005



--- Comment #5 from Jerry James  ---
Thank you for the review, Ben.  I have not contacted upstream about the license
issue, but will do so now.

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1302504] Review Request: elog - Weblog server and client

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1302504



--- Comment #1 from Ben Rosser  ---
Updated with a bunch of fixes:

- Use attr to set ownership on /usr/share/elog.
- Fixed typo in systemd service file URL
- Revised package summaries.
- Moved elogs out of datadir and into /var/lib.

Spec URL: https://tc01.fedorapeople.org/elog/elog.spec
SRPM URL: https://tc01.fedorapeople.org/elog/elog-3.1.1-4.fc23.src.rpm

This addresses the "dangerous command in post" warning (by using the correct
method, %attr, to set ownership). I also moved the logbooks into /var/lib/elog
instead of /usr/share/elog, as that directory should be read-only.

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1336005] Review Request: gap-pkg-resclasses - Set-theoretic computations with Residue Classes

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1336005

Ben Rosser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #4 from Ben Rosser  ---
The package is approved, but since the full text of the license is not
available, you should query upstream about including it if you haven't already.

Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed



= 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]: 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 %license.
[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". 5 files have unknown license. Detailed
 output of licensecheck in /home/bjr/Programming/fedora/1336005-gap-
 pkg-resclasses/licensecheck.txt
[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
[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.
[-]: 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]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 2 files.
[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]: Dist tag is present.
[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 does not use a name that already exists.
[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:
[?]: 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.
[-]: 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.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
 files.
[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]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file

[Bug 1230213] Review Request: perl-Cookie-Baker - Cookie string generator / parser

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1230213



--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-Cookie-Baker-0.06-1.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-0578df5386

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1230213] Review Request: perl-Cookie-Baker - Cookie string generator / parser

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1230213

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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1230213] Review Request: perl-Cookie-Baker - Cookie string generator / parser

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1230213



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-Cookie-Baker-0.06-1.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-6c34a4ccaa

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1342693] Review Request: python2-typing -Typing defines a standard notation for type annotations

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1342693

Ralph Bean  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |MODIFIED
 CC||rb...@redhat.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|rb...@redhat.com
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #2 from Ralph Bean  ---
There's one change that you should make before importing this into dist-git.
There is a README.rst file that should be included in the %files section as a
%doc.

That aside, it looks good and simple.

Package is approved!


Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated


= 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". 7 files have unknown license. Detailed
 output of licensecheck in
 /home/threebean/1342693-python2-typing/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[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
[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.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[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]: 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 %license.
[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]: Dist tag is present.
[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 does not use a name that already exists.
[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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
 process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
 provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep

= 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.
[x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
 translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and 

[Bug 1300222] Review Request: ripe-atlas-tools - The official command line client for RIPE Atlas

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1300222

Jan Včelák  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE
Last Closed||2016-06-03 19:43:18



-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1300217] Review Request: python-ripe-atlas-sagan - A parsing library for RIPE Atlas measurement results

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1300217

Jan Včelák  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE
Last Closed||2016-06-03 19:43:00



-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1300222] Review Request: ripe-atlas-tools - The official command line client for RIPE Atlas

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1300222
Bug 1300222 depends on bug 1300217, which changed state.

Bug 1300217 Summary: Review Request: python-ripe-atlas-sagan - A parsing 
library for RIPE Atlas measurement results
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1300217

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE



-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1300222] Review Request: ripe-atlas-tools - The official command line client for RIPE Atlas

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1300222
Bug 1300222 depends on bug 1300219, which changed state.

Bug 1300219 Summary: Review Request: python-ripe-atlas-cousteau - Python 
wrapper for RIPE Atlas API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1300219

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE



-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1300219] Review Request: python-ripe-atlas-cousteau - Python wrapper for RIPE Atlas API

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1300219

Jan Včelák  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE
Last Closed|2016-05-24 14:46:21 |2016-06-03 19:43:10



-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1342693] Review Request: python2-typing -Typing defines a standard notation for type annotations

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1342693

kushal...@gmail.com  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|Review Request: |Review Request:
   |python-typing -Typing   |python2-typing -Typing
   |defines a standard notation |defines a standard notation
   |for type annotations|for type annotations



-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1342693] Review Request: python-typing -Typing defines a standard notation for type annotations

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1342693



--- Comment #1 from kushal...@gmail.com  ---
New spec: https://kushal.fedorapeople.org/packages/python2-typing.spec
New srpm:
https://kushal.fedorapeople.org/packages/python2-typing-3.5.1.0-1.fc23.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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1268380] Review Request: python-sphinx-theme-bootstrap - A sphinx theme that integrates the Bootstrap framework

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1268380



--- Comment #25 from William Moreno  ---
I have mkdocs, than bundle but jquerry1 and jquerry2, you can check the spec
here:

http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/mkdocs.git/tree/mkdocs.spec

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1327511] Review Request: php-justinrainbow-json-schema - A library to validate a json schema

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327511



--- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System  ---
php-justinrainbow-json-schema-2.0.5-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7
testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this
bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-b7a27e5732

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1327307] Review Request: golang-github-eapache-go-resiliency - Resiliency patterns for golang

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327307

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|CLOSED  |ON_QA
 Resolution|ERRATA  |---
   Keywords||Reopened



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
golang-github-eapache-go-resiliency-0-0.2.gitb86b1ec.el7 has been pushed to the
Fedora EPEL 7 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note
of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-b9bb950694

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1327762] Review Request: golang-github-Shopify-sarama - Sarama is a Go library for Apache Kafka 0.8 and 0.9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327762
Bug 1327762 depends on bug 1327307, which changed state.

Bug 1327307 Summary: Review Request: golang-github-eapache-go-resiliency - 
Resiliency patterns for golang
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327307

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|CLOSED  |ON_QA
 Resolution|ERRATA  |---



-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1327781] Review Request: golang-github-olivere-elastic - Elasticsearch client for Go

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327781

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|CLOSED  |ON_QA
 Resolution|ERRATA  |---
   Keywords||Reopened



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
golang-github-olivere-elastic-2.0.12-0.2.git3cfe882.el7 has been pushed to the
Fedora EPEL 7 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note
of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-1d8ebe1be3

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1342693] New: Review Request: python-typing -Typing defines a standard notation for type annotations

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1342693

Bug ID: 1342693
   Summary: Review Request: python-typing -Typing defines a
standard notation for type annotations
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: m...@kushaldas.in
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: https://kushal.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-typing.spec
SRPM URL:
https://kushal.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-typing-3.5.1.0-1.fc23.src.rpm
Description: Typing defines a standard notation for Python function and
variable type
annotations. The notation can be used for documenting code in a concise,
standard format, and it has been designed to also be used by static and runtime
type checkers, static analyzers, IDEs and other tools.

Fedora Account System Username: kushal

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1342687] Review Request: python-backports-ssl-match-hostname - The ssl match_hostname() function from Python 3.5

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1342687

William Moreno  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1342688




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1342688
[Bug 1342688] Review Request: python-livereload - Command line utility for
starting a server in a directory
-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1342688] Review Request: python-livereload - Command line utility for starting a server in a directory

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1342688

William Moreno  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1308682, 1308681
 Depends On||1342687




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308681
[Bug 1308681] rename livereload package to meet python guidelines.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308682
[Bug 1308682] please update spec file to provide python2 and python3
library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1342687
[Bug 1342687] Review Request: python-backports-ssl-match-hostname - The ssl
match_hostname() function from Python 3.5
-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1160672] Review Request: seafile-client - Seafile cloud storage desktop client

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1160672

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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1160672] Review Request: seafile-client - Seafile cloud storage desktop client

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1160672



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
seafile-5.1.2-3.fc24 seafile-client-5.1.1-3.fc24 has been submitted as an
update to Fedora 24.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-6aa664154f

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1342688] New: Review Request: python-livereload - Command line utility for starting a server in a directory

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1342688

Bug ID: 1342688
   Summary: Review Request: python-livereload - Command line
utility for starting a server in a directory
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: williamjmore...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL:
https://williamjmorenor.fedorapeople.org/rpmdev/python-livereload.spec
SRPM URL:
https://williamjmorenor.fedorapeople.org/rpmdev/python-livereload-2.4.1-2.fc25.src.rpm
Description: Command line utility for starting a server in a directory
Fedora Account System Username: williamjmorenor

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1160671] Review Request: seafile - Cloud storage system

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1160671



--- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System  ---
seafile-5.1.2-3.fc24 seafile-client-5.1.1-3.fc24 has been submitted as an
update to Fedora 24.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-6aa664154f

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1160671] Review Request: seafile - Cloud storage system

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1160671

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1160672] Review Request: seafile-client - Seafile cloud storage desktop client

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1160672



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
seafile-5.1.2-3.fc24 seafile-client-5.1.1-3.fc24 has been submitted as an
update to Fedora 24.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-6aa664154f

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1341815] Review Request: python-zope-testrunner - Zope testrunner script

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1341815



--- Comment #3 from William Moreno  ---
Can please take as review swap this please:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1342687

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1342687] Review Request: python-backports-ssl-match-hostname - The ssl match_hostname() function from Python 3.5

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1342687

William Moreno  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|Review Request:  - The|python-backports-ssl-match-
   |ssl match_hostname()|hostname - The ssl
   |function from Python 3.5|match_hostname() function
   ||from Python 3.5



-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1342687] New: Review Request: - The ssl match_hostname() function from Python 3.5

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1342687

Bug ID: 1342687
   Summary: Review Request:  - The ssl
match_hostname() function from Python 3.5
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: williamjmore...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL:
https://williamjmorenor.fedorapeople.org/rpmdev/python-backports-ssl-match-hostname.spec
SRPM URL:
https://williamjmorenor.fedorapeople.org/rpmdev/python-backports.ssl_match_hostname-3.5.0.1-0.fc25.src.rpm
Description: The ssl match_hostname() function from Python 3.5
Fedora Account System Username: williamjmorenor

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1297550] Review Request: golang-github-jmespath-go-jmespath - Golang implementation of JMESPath

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1297550



--- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System  ---
golang-github-jmespath-go-jmespath-0-0.1.git0b12d6b.fc23 has been pushed to the
Fedora 23 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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1333525] Review Request: python-xunitparser - Read JUnit/ XUnit XML files and map them to Python objects

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1333525



--- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-xunitparser-1.3.3-1.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1269806] Review Request: golang-github-aws-aws-sdk-go - AWS SDK for the Go programming language

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269806



--- Comment #30 from Fedora Update System  ---
golang-github-aws-aws-sdk-go-1.1.3-1.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1300219] Review Request: python-ripe-atlas-cousteau - Python wrapper for RIPE Atlas API

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1300219



--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-ripe-atlas-cousteau-1.2-1.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1271795] Review Request: nodejs-css-select - A CSS selector compiler/ engine

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271795

Jared Smith  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
  Flags|needinfo?(jsmith.fedora@gma |
   |il.com) |
Last Closed||2016-06-03 16:17:23



-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1336552] Review Request: exodusii - Library to store and retrieve transient finite element data

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1336552



--- Comment #1 from Christoph Junghans  ---
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1340152] Review Request: python-certbot-apache - Apache plugin to automatically configure certificate via certbot

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1340152



--- Comment #4 from James Hogarth  ---
Upstream just released 0.8.0

Spec URL:
https://jhogarth.fedorapeople.org/certbot-apache/python-certbot-apache.spec
SRPM URL:
https://jhogarth.fedorapeople.org/certbot-apache/python-certbot-apache-0.8.0-1.fc25.src.rpm

Rawhide koji build:http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=14370567

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1328951] Review Request: commissaire-client - CLI for Commissaire

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328951



--- Comment #3 from William Moreno  ---
Package Review
==

Issues:
===
- Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
BR must python2-devel

Also for Fedora packaging it is preferred to build using python3.

- Check packaging guideline about pre relases versión to fix the rpmlint issue
about bad versión format.

- Does this package requires commissaire at runtime or can work with remote
hosts?


= 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.
[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.
[-]: 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.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. 
[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]: 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 %license.
[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]: Dist tag is present.
[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 does not use a name that already exists.
[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

Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
 process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
 provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[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]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.

= EXTRA items =
Generic:
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.

Rpmlint
---
Checking: commissaire-client-0.0.1rc3-2.fc25.noarch.rpm
  commissaire-client-0.0.1rc3-2.fc25.src.rpm
commissaire-client.noarch: E: invalid-version 0.0.1rc3
commissaire-client.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary commctl
commissaire-client.src: E: invalid-version 0.0.1rc3
commissaire-client.src:23: W: unversioned-explicit-provides commctl
commissaire-client.src:40: W: macro-in-comment %{__python2}
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 3 warnings.

Rpmlint (installed packages)

commissaire-client.noarch: E: invalid-version 

[Bug 1340269] Review Request: keepassx0 - Cross-platform password manager

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1340269



--- Comment #5 from Stephen Gallagher  ---
(In reply to Parag AN(पराग) from comment #4)
> Okay In case if this helps, as per commented in FESCo ticket, submitting an
> updated package here.
> 
> SRPM:
> https://pnemade.fedorapeople.org/fedora-work/keepassx0-0.4.4-2.fc24.src.rpm
> SPEC: https://pnemade.fedorapeople.org/fedora-work/keepassx0.spec

I should have been more clear: it contains sources licensed with BSD 3-clause
*in addition* to the GPLv2+ licensed files. According to
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?#Multiple_Licensing_Scenarios
this needs to be:

```
# The entire source code is GPLv2+ except crypto/ which is BSD 3-clause
License: GPLv2+ and BSD
```

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1340551] Review Request: gap-pkg-irredsol - Irreducible soluble linear groups over finite fields

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1340551

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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1340551] Review Request: gap-pkg-irredsol - Irreducible soluble linear groups over finite fields

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1340551



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
gap-pkg-irredsol-1.3.1-1.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-5caf05f266

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1341283] Review Request: php-lukasreschke-id3parser - ID3 parser library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1341283



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
php-lukasreschke-id3parser-0.0.1-1.fc23 has been submitted as an update to
Fedora 23. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-90321c0ca4

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1341283] Review Request: php-lukasreschke-id3parser - ID3 parser library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1341283



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
php-lukasreschke-id3parser-0.0.1-1.el7 has been submitted as an update to
Fedora EPEL 7.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-c64b5873f4

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1341283] Review Request: php-lukasreschke-id3parser - ID3 parser library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1341283

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1341283] Review Request: php-lukasreschke-id3parser - ID3 parser library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1341283



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
php-lukasreschke-id3parser-0.0.1-1.fc22 has been submitted as an update to
Fedora 22. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-3156705505

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1341283] Review Request: php-lukasreschke-id3parser - ID3 parser library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1341283



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
php-lukasreschke-id3parser-0.0.1-1.fc24 has been submitted as an update to
Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-b467a790cf

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1340269] Review Request: keepassx0 - Cross-platform password manager

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1340269



--- Comment #4 from Parag AN(पराग)  ---
Okay In case if this helps, as per commented in FESCo ticket, submitting an
updated package here.

SRPM:
https://pnemade.fedorapeople.org/fedora-work/keepassx0-0.4.4-2.fc24.src.rpm
SPEC: https://pnemade.fedorapeople.org/fedora-work/keepassx0.spec

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1331704] Review Request: glusterfs-coreutils - Mimics standard Linux coreutils for GlusterFS clusters

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1331704



--- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/glusterfs-coreutils

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1160672] Review Request: seafile-client - Seafile cloud storage desktop client

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1160672



--- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/seafile-client

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1340551] Review Request: gap-pkg-irredsol - Irreducible soluble linear groups over finite fields

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1340551



--- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/gap-pkg-irredsol

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 946968] Review Request: pcmanfm-qt - Qt port of the LXDE file manager PCManFM

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=946968

Jon Ciesla  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |NOTABUG
  Flags|needinfo?(limburgher@gmail. |
   |com)|
Last Closed|2013-04-10 23:53:25 |2016-06-03 12:42:42



--- Comment #25 from Jon Ciesla  ---
See new process:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageDB_admin_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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1230213] Review Request: perl-Cookie-Baker - Cookie string generator / parser

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1230213



--- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/perl-Cookie-Baker

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1305502] Review Request: python-adal - ADAL for Python

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305502



--- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/python-adal

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1332307] Review Request: libcxx - C++ standard library targeting C++11

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332307



--- Comment #15 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/libcxx

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1300217] Review Request: python-ripe-atlas-sagan - A parsing library for RIPE Atlas measurement results

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1300217



--- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/python-ripe-atlas-sagan

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1341283] Review Request: php-lukasreschke-id3parser - ID3 parser library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1341283



--- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/php-lukasreschke-id3parser

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1300222] Review Request: ripe-atlas-tools - The official command line client for RIPE Atlas

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1300222



--- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/ripe-atlas-tools

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1327511] Review Request: php-justinrainbow-json-schema - A library to validate a json schema

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327511



--- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System  ---
php-justinrainbow-json-schema-2.0.5-1.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23
testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this
bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-398e3384d4

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1020292] Review Request: bitcoin - Peer-to-peer digital currency

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1020292



--- Comment #40 from Alexandre Franke  ---
Has upstream considered building and distributing a Flatpak of Bitcoin? That
would solve quite a few issues, including those exposed here.

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1020292] Review Request: bitcoin - Peer-to-peer digital currency

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1020292

Neal Gompa  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||ngomp...@gmail.com



--- Comment #39 from Neal Gompa  ---
It might be worth considering exclusively offering Bitcoin in an out-of-band
repository built somewhat differently. For example, perhaps building against
EL7 and using that build for all Fedora targets along with EL7. Since it uses
its own bundled crypto, I would suggest that's probably the best way to go. It
might even be worth working with upstream to provide fully deterministic builds
that would work for RPM based distributions, built from the Fedora
infrastructure.

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1341642] Review Request: cryptlib - Security library and toolkit for encryption and authentication services

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1341642



--- Comment #3 from Ralf Senderek  ---
I have made some improvements with the new release (release 2) of the cryptlib
spec file:

 * I made all subpackages "noarch" that don't require or provide a shared lib.

 * I included a mandatory source code signature check that verifies the 
   file "cl343_fedora.zip"

 * I added subpackages for Perl and Javadoc

 * I disabled two tests from the native stestlib binary that are responsible
   for a failure due to a change on the openssh.org server that is contacted
   via the network during the cryptlib validation tests

New (release 2)

Spec URL: https://crypto-bone.com/fedora/cryptlib.spec
SRPM URL: https://crypto-bone.com/fedora/cryptlib-3.4.3-2.fc23.src.rpm

And the successful KOJI build for f23 here:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=14367434

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1297550] Review Request: golang-github-jmespath-go-jmespath - Golang implementation of JMESPath

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1297550



--- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System  ---
golang-github-jmespath-go-jmespath-0-0.1.git0b12d6b.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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1269806] Review Request: golang-github-aws-aws-sdk-go - AWS SDK for the Go programming language

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269806



--- Comment #29 from Fedora Update System  ---
golang-github-aws-aws-sdk-go-1.1.3-1.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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1331704] Review Request: glusterfs-coreutils - Mimics standard Linux coreutils for GlusterFS clusters

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1331704

Kaleb KEITHLEY  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1160672] Review Request: seafile-client - Seafile cloud storage desktop client

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1160672

Julien Enselme  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #7 from Julien Enselme  ---
Looks 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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1160672] Review Request: seafile-client - Seafile cloud storage desktop client

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1160672



--- Comment #6 from Nikos Roussos  ---
I completely missed that.

SPEC: https://comzeradd.fedorapeople.org/specs/seafile-client.spec
SRPM:
https://comzeradd.fedorapeople.org/srpms/seafile-client-5.1.1-3.fc24.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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1160672] Review Request: seafile-client - Seafile cloud storage desktop client

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1160672



--- Comment #5 from Julien Enselme  ---
> gtk-update-icon-cache is invoked in %postun and %posttrans if package
> contains icons.
> Note: icons in seafile-client
> See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Icon_Cache

That's still missing. Once this is done, I'll approve the package.

> . I also took the chance to use the https upstream url and add an appdata 
> file to look nice on Software Center

Good.

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1160672] Review Request: seafile-client - Seafile cloud storage desktop client

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1160672



--- Comment #4 from Nikos Roussos  ---
Thanks. I update the SRPM with the right SPEC. I also took the chance to use
the https upstream url and add an appdata file to look nice on Software Center.
I'll open an upstream PR for the appdata.

SPEC: https://comzeradd.fedorapeople.org/specs/seafile-client.spec
SRPM:
https://comzeradd.fedorapeople.org/srpms/seafile-client-5.1.1-2.fc24.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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1337120] Review Request: gyazo - Fast screen capture tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1337120



--- Comment #27 from Fedora Update System  ---
gyazo-1.2-1.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-3193c9df0d

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1337120] Review Request: gyazo - Fast screen capture tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1337120



--- Comment #26 from Fedora Update System  ---
gyazo-1.2-1.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-b6f000cc62

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1337120] Review Request: gyazo - Fast screen capture tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1337120

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1327511] Review Request: php-justinrainbow-json-schema - A library to validate a json schema

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327511

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System  ---
php-JsonSchema-1.6.1-3.fc24, php-justinrainbow-json-schema-2.0.5-1.fc24 has
been pushed to the Fedora 24 testing repository. If problems still persist,
please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-ba31f25ade

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1308488] Review Request: mediaconch - Most relevant technical and tag data for video and audio files

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308488



--- Comment #5 from Vasiliy Glazov  ---
Spec URL:
http://raw.githubusercontent.com/RussianFedora/mediaconch/master/mediaconch.spec
SRPM URL:
http://koji.russianfedora.pro/kojifiles/packages/mediaconch/16.05/1.fc25.R/src/mediaconch-16.05-1.fc25.R.src.rpm

Updated to 16.05.

-- 
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1160672] Review Request: seafile-client - Seafile cloud storage desktop client

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1160672

Julien Enselme  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|juj...@jujens.eu
  Flags||fedora-review?



--- Comment #3 from Julien Enselme  ---
Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed


Issues:
===
- gtk-update-icon-cache is invoked in %postun and %posttrans if package
  contains icons.
  Note: icons in seafile-client
  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Icon_Cache


= MUST items =

C/C++:
[X]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[X]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[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.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "Unknown or generated". 278 files have unknown license.
 Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/jenselme/Downloads/1160672
 -seafile-client/licensecheck.txt
[X]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[X]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 Note: Directories without known owners:
 /usr/share/icons/hicolor/24x24, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/22x22,
 /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48/apps,
 /usr/share/icons/hicolor/22x22/apps,
 /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32/apps,
 /usr/share/icons/hicolor/24x24/apps,
 /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16,
 /usr/share/icons/hicolor/128x128/apps,
 /usr/share/icons/hicolor/128x128,
 /usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable/apps,
 /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32,
 /usr/share/icons/hicolor, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable
[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.
[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.
[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 1 files.
[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]: 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 %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[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 contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or
 desktop-file-validate if there is such a file.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[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 does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package