[Bug 1473543] Review Request: python-ansicolors - ANSI colors support for python print output

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1473543

Sebastian Kisela  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE
Last Closed||2017-08-09 01:29:30



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1427634] Review Request: syncthing - Continuous File Synchronization

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1427634



--- Comment #27 from Jan ONDREJ  ---
(In reply to Fabio Valentini from comment #17)
> - 3 x E: hardcoded-library-path in */usr/lib/systemd/user-preset
>
> I can't fix this, because systemd's RPM macros don't provide a
> %{_userpresetdir} analog to %{_presetdir}.

Why you at least don't use:

%{_usr}/lib/systemd/user-preset

or may be better:

%{_presetdir}/../user-preset

And why you can't use system-preset? If rpm macros are set to system-preset,
then I think this should be used. I am not an systemd expert and didn't find
anything about system-preset vs user-preset, but I think user-preset is for
users and system-preset for packages installed by system, which includes rpm
packages.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1478210] Review Request: openas2 - Java implementation of EDIINT AS2

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1478210



--- Comment #7 from Stuart D Gathman  ---
jabberd seems to be a good package to emulate.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #36 from Honggang LI  ---
Created attachment 1310973
  --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1310973=edit
Use %{?systemd_requires} macro

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #35 from Honggang LI  ---
(In reply to Kevin Fenzi from comment #33)

> Slightly longer term, we have put in a PR to make lorax not prune perl: 
> https://github.com/rhinstaller/lorax/pull/228 once thats merged and in a
> rawhide lorax build we can retag or rebuild rdma-core

I checked
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//packages/lorax/27.5/1.fc27/src/lorax-27.5-1.fc27.src.rpm
, the patch had been merged.

Joard, we need rebuild rdma-core again to get the new rdma-core package into
Fedora Rawhide. I had installed a fresh Rawhide (f27) virtual machine, f27
still using the old rdma package.

Please consider to apply this patch, it fixes to minor issue.
1) As #comment 31 suggest, it use %{?systemd_requires} macro
2) srp_daemon should own directory %{_libexecdir}/srp_daemon

srp_daemon only owns %{_libexecdir}/srp_daemon/start_on_all_ports . It should
own the whole directory %{_libexecdir}/srp_daemon . Issue 2) exists in upstream
rdma-core git repo too.

diff --git a/rdma-core.spec b/rdma-core.spec
index 540889b..ce244f3 100644
--- a/rdma-core.spec
+++ b/rdma-core.spec
@@ -175,9 +175,7 @@ displays information about RDMA devices.

 %package -n ibacm
 Summary: InfiniBand Communication Manager Assistant
-Requires(post): systemd-units
-Requires(preun): systemd-units
-Requires(postun): systemd-units
+%{?systemd_requires}
 Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
 Requires: libibumad%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
 Requires: libibverbs%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
@@ -194,9 +192,7 @@ library knows how to talk directly to the ibacm daemon to
retrieve data.

 %package -n iwpmd
 Summary: iWarp Port Mapper userspace daemon
-Requires(post): systemd-units
-Requires(preun): systemd-units
-Requires(postun): systemd-units
+%{?systemd_requires}
 Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}

 %description -n iwpmd
@@ -242,9 +238,7 @@ Summary: Tools for using the InfiniBand SRP protocol
devices
 Obsoletes: srptools <= 1.0.3
 Provides: srptools = %{version}-%{release}
 Obsoletes: openib-srptools <= 0.0.6
-Requires(post): systemd-units
-Requires(preun): systemd-units
-Requires(postun): systemd-units
+%{?systemd_requires}
 Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
 Requires: libibumad%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
 Requires: libibverbs%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
@@ -489,7 +483,7 @@ rm -rf %{buildroot}/%{_initrddir}/

 %files -n srp_daemon
 %config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/srp_daemon.conf
-%{_libexecdir}/srp_daemon/start_on_all_ports
+%{_libexecdir}/srp_daemon
 %{_unitdir}/srp_daemon.service
 %{_unitdir}/srp_daemon_port@.service
 %{_sbindir}/ibsrpdm

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1479027] Review Request: golang-github-golang-image - Go supplementary image libraries

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1479027



--- Comment #2 from Athos Ribeiro  ---
Sure! I will send the pull requests for the necessary updates later this week,
would do it today, but it seems part of our infra is down

Thanks for taking this review as well!

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1427634] Review Request: syncthing - Continuous File Synchronization

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1427634



--- Comment #26 from Athos Ribeiro  ---
> syncthing upstream was a bit "uncooperative"
> about fixing some things ...

oh :(

> > Have you thought about pinging systemd packagers about this?
> 
> I have, a month ago. Without any reaction so far.
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1468501
> 
> > Have you thought about pinging systemd upstream about this as well?
> 
> I have now, thanks for bugging me.
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1479580

That's good enough, let's proceed with approving this review


> The only question is whether to add this to the main package or the -devel
> subpackage (or both).

They are nly shipped in the source tarball and in the binary package, so adding
it in the Provides in the main package shall be enough.

In this case, I believe you would need to add the licenses of the bundled
libraries in the License tag of the package. If you want, you can even set the
different License tag only for the package with the bundled code.

Note that font-awesome is also bundling the fonts (which most of the ruby gems
also do, for a different reason) and those have the Open Font License.

So the license tag should read

MPLv2.0 and MIT and OFL

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1478210] Review Request: openas2 - Java implementation of EDIINT AS2

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1478210



--- Comment #6 from Stuart D Gathman  ---
Need to make configs readable by openas2, but not by the world (keys and
passwords).  I don't see any other packages doing that with configs in /etc. 
Maybe I should move configs back to /var/lib/openas2?

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1478210] Review Request: openas2 - Java implementation of EDIINT AS2

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1478210



--- Comment #5 from Stuart D Gathman  ---
Spec URL: https://gathman.org/linux/SPECS/openas2.spec
SRPM URL: https://gathman.org/linux/f25/src/openas2-2.3.0-6.fc25.src.rpm

Moved logs to /var/log/openas2.  Move config files to /etc/openas2.  (Both with
symlinks to keep default config working.)  Added global bundle option.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1478210] Review Request: openas2 - Java implementation of EDIINT AS2

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1478210



--- Comment #4 from Stuart D Gathman  ---
The conditional macro doesn't help, because it won't build on EL7 (because of
the missing jars).  I am building on Fedora 25, hence the bundled bouncycastle
is from Fedora 25 - with all the security patches Fedora sees fit to apply. 
Because the jars are bundled (copied from /usr/share/java by xmvn), the
resulting rpm installs and runs on el7 - even though it is labeled fc25.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1478210] Review Request: openas2 - Java implementation of EDIINT AS2

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1478210

Mat Booth  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||mat.bo...@redhat.com



--- Comment #3 from Mat Booth  ---
> For my purposes, I can comment out xmvn_subst and build on Fedora (so that
> the jars are included in the server lib dir).  Maybe there should be a build
> option for that.

To perform different actions on RHEL, you can make use of the conditional macro
like this:

%if 0%{?fedora}
# Do Fedora only stuff
%endif

%if 0%{?rhel}
# Do RHEL only stuff
%endif

This way you can have a single spec file that builds for all platforms without
changes. It's pretty nasty to bundle bouncycastle though -- it's not
unprecedented to have to fix security problems in that package and if you are
bundling it, you will not receive any security patches that we might apply.

> Will these eventually make it to EL7?

Only if someone volunteers to maintain the el7 branch. :-)

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1427634] Review Request: syncthing - Continuous File Synchronization

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1427634



--- Comment #25 from Fabio Valentini  ---
> Thanks for the hard work packaging this, it is not a simple package at all :)

Yeah, it's not so easy, but hugo isn't simple, either. At least you don't have
to patch build scripts. syncthing upstream was a bit "uncooperative" about
fixing some things ...

> Have you thought about pinging systemd packagers about this?

I have, a month ago. Without any reaction so far.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1468501

> Have you thought about pinging systemd upstream about this as well?

I have now, thanks for bugging me.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1479580

> The binary file has the gui/default/vendor projects embedded in it, which 
> contains (...)

I didn't even notice that it bundles this stuff. If you decide that using the
bundled stuff is fine, I'll add those lines (versions according to source code
in the tarball):

Provides: bundled(angular) = 1.2.9
Provides: bundled(angular-dirPagination) = 759009c
Provides: bundled(angular-translate) = 2.9.0.1
Provides: bundled(angular-translate-loader-static-files) = 2.11.0
Provides: bundled(bootstrap) = 3.3.5
Provides: bundled(font-awesome) = 4.5.0
Provides: bundled(jquery) = 2.2.2

The only question is whether to add this to the main package or the -devel
subpackage (or both).

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1427634] Review Request: syncthing - Continuous File Synchronization

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1427634



--- Comment #24 from Athos Ribeiro  ---
Thanks for the hard work packaging this, it is not a simple package at all :)

(In reply to Fabio Valentini from comment #15)
> Additionally, I have included a systemd preset file to *not* enable the
> syncthing user service for all users at installation, matching the default
> system preset present on fedora (which is missing for user services).

Have you thought about pinging systemd packagers about this?

(In reply to Fabio Valentini from comment #17)
> - 3 x E: hardcoded-library-path in */usr/lib/systemd/user-preset
>
> I can't fix this, because systemd's RPM macros don't provide a
> %{_userpresetdir} analog to %{_presetdir}.

Have you thought about pinging systemd upstream about this as well?

- RPM lint throws the following errors:
  syncthing-debuginfo.x86_64: E: useless-provides debuginfo(build-id)
  syncthing.src:337: E: hardcoded-library-path in
%{buildroot}/usr/lib/systemd/user-preset
  syncthing.src:338: E: hardcoded-library-path in
%{buildroot}/usr/lib/systemd/user-preset/90-syncthing.preset
  syncthing.src:503: E: hardcoded-library-path in
/usr/lib/systemd/user-preset/90-syncthing.preset

Which are all explained in the comments above. You could probably use
%{_prefix} for the path to silence rpmlint, but I believe this macro could be
included in systemd macros in the future.

- /usr/lib/systemd/user-preset dir has no owner, although it belongs to the
fedora-release package (I have no idea on why fedora-review triggered this)

The package looks good! Before approving, I need to check if shipping the gui
resources in the binary file is ok:

The binary file has the gui/default/vendor projects embedded in it, which
contains

angular
 - angular 1.2.9
 - angular-translate 2.9.0.1
 - angular-translate-loader-static-files 2.11.0
 - angular-dirPagination 759009c
bootstrap
font-awesome
jquery

You will probably need to provide the bundled projects though. I checked
copr-frontend as an example for that, and it does provide

bundled(bootstrap) = 3.3.4
bundled(bootstrap-combobox) = 1.1.6
bundled(bootstrap-select) = 1.5.4
bundled(bootstrap-treeview) = 1.0.1
bundled(font-awesome) = 1.0.1
bundled(jquery) = 1.11.3
bundled(jquery-ui) = 1.11.4

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1464194] Review Request: Framework dependency package for supporting ixpdimm_sw which installs the CLI , CIM and the I18N frameworks

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1464194



--- Comment #8 from Dan Williams  ---
(In reply to Rutvij Karkhanis from comment #7)
> We are working on creating a submodule.

Great, then we can close this request and work this all through updates to the
ixpdimm-sw packaging.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1450212] Review Request: pyowm - Python wrapper library for the OpenWeatherMap

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1450212



--- Comment #3 from Paul Whalen  ---
Updated spec and srpm

SPEC: https://pwhalen.fedorapeople.org/packages/pyowm/pyowm.spec
SRPM:
https://pwhalen.fedorapeople.org/packages/pyowm/pyowm-2.6.1-3.fc26.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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1427634] Review Request: syncthing - Continuous File Synchronization

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1427634



--- Comment #23 from Fabio Valentini  ---
Well ... last time I checked, golang (expecially golang(XXX) dependencies on
other golang-XXX-devel packages) was a mess on RHEL/EPEL, and that's why I
turned on bundled dependencies for RHEL builds.

However, after just reading more about EPEL7 packaging and the discussions
around bundling, I've decided against building this package for EPEL7 (for
now). So you can continue this review as fedora-only. 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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1409400] Review Request: parzip - High performance parallel pkzip implementation

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1409400
Bug 1409400 depends on bug 1409661, which changed state.

Bug 1409661 Summary: Backport %_global_cxxflags into F24 and F25
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1409661

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |EOL



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1479073] Review Request: tcl-tclnagios - Library to simplify writing Nagios plugins in Tcl

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1479073



--- Comment #2 from Wart  ---
Cleaned up the remaining meaningful rpmlint warnings:

SPEC: https://wart.fedorapeople.org/tcl-tclnagios.spec
SRPM: https://wart.fedorapeople.org/tcl-tclnagios-1.3-3.fc27.src.rpm

Scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2087

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1462443] Review Request: libaec - Adaptive Entropy Coding library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1462443



--- Comment #15 from Christoph Junghans  ---
(In reply to Christoph Junghans from comment #14)
> > Patch was send to hdf5-ow...@fedoraproject.org.
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/hdf5/pull-request/1
And merged.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1479073] Review Request: tcl-tclnagios - Library to simplify writing Nagios plugins in Tcl

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1479073



--- Comment #1 from Wart  ---
Updated spec and src rpm to clean up a couple of rpmlint warnings:

Updated SPEC: https://wart.fedorapeople.org/tcl-tclnagios.spec
Updated SRPM: https://wart.fedorapeople.org/tcl-tclnagios-1.3-2.fc27.src.rpm

Build result in koji: 
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=21110224

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1421048] Review Request: deepin-sound-theme - Deepin sound theme

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1421048



--- Comment #3 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
Sorry but if you do a snapshot, you must include the date with the git
revision, as I pointed out in my previous comment:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Versioning#Snapshots

>That field must at minimum consist of the date in eight-digit "MMDD" 
>format. >The packager MAY include up to 17 characters of additional 
>information after the >date. The following formats are suggested:
>
>MMDD.
>MMDD 
>
>Where  is a short string identifying the source code control system 
>upstream uses (e.g. "git", "svn", "hg") or the string "snap".  is 
>either a short git commit hash, a subversion revision number, or something 
>else useful in identifying the precise revision in upstream's source code 
>control system. Obviously if CVS is used, no such revision information exists, 
>so it would be omitted, but otherwise it SHOULD be included.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1374024] Review Request: python-plotcat - Python library for plotting live serial input using matplotlib

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1374024

Fedora End Of Life  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |EOL
Last Closed||2017-08-08 13:10:19



--- Comment #13 from Fedora End Of Life  ---
Fedora 24 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2017-08-08. Fedora 24 is
no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further
security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug.

If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of
Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you
are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the
current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this
bug.

Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1344276] Review Request: gdeploy - Tool to deploy GlusterFS clusters and other utilities

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1344276



--- Comment #29 from Sachidananda Urs  ---
(In reply to Ken Dreyer from comment #28)
> Please accept my apologies for the delay and lack of communication! That is
> bad.
> 
> I can continue the review or let someone else take it.
> 
> Looks like the LICENSE file should be listed as %license under %files.
> 
> Would you please use the newer %py2_build and %py2_install macros?
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python
> 
> Can this package work with Python 3 instead of Python 2? Maybe it would be a
> good idea to add a comment to the .spec file explaining why this will not
> work with Python 3 if that is the case.
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FinalizingFedoraSwitchtoPython3 is coming
> eventually. You could conditionalize py2/py3 with "%if %{?rhel} < 8" if you
> want to share the same .spec file across RHEL 7 and Fedora.

Ack! Will do that.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1427634] Review Request: syncthing - Continuous File Synchronization

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1427634



--- Comment #22 from Athos Ribeiro  ---
Hi Fabio,

Sorry for the long wait here!

I am working on this review ATM. Yes, if you are shipping a bundled version for
RHEL, it would be nice to provide de bundled package. Is there a reason for
bundling it though?

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1344276] Review Request: gdeploy - Tool to deploy GlusterFS clusters and other utilities

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1344276



--- Comment #28 from Ken Dreyer  ---
Please accept my apologies for the delay and lack of communication! That is
bad.

I can continue the review or let someone else take it.

Looks like the LICENSE file should be listed as %license under %files.

Would you please use the newer %py2_build and %py2_install macros?
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python

Can this package work with Python 3 instead of Python 2? Maybe it would be a
good idea to add a comment to the .spec file explaining why this will not work
with Python 3 if that is the case.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FinalizingFedoraSwitchtoPython3 is coming
eventually. You could conditionalize py2/py3 with "%if %{?rhel} < 8" if you
want to share the same .spec file across RHEL 7 and 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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1478052] Review Request: nuvola-app-google-play-music - Google Calendar web app for Nuvola Player 3

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1478052



--- Comment #3 from mgans...@alice.de  ---
Thanks for the review.

Spec URL:
https://martinkg.fedorapeople.org/Review/SPECS/nuvola-app-google-play-music.spec
SRPM URL:
https://martinkg.fedorapeople.org/Review/SRPMS/nuvola-app-google-play-music-5.19-2.fc26.src.rpm

%changelog
* Tue Aug 08 2017 Martin Gansser  - 5.19-2
- correct %%{name}.metainfo.xml

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1427634] Review Request: syncthing - Continuous File Synchronization

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1427634



--- Comment #21 from Fabio Valentini  ---
Updated .spec and SRPM files for the newest hotfix 0.14.35 upstream release:

Spec URL: https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/packages/syncthing.spec

SRPM URL:
https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/packages/syncthing-0.14.35-1.fc26.src.rpm


koji scratch build for rawhide:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=21108672

koji scratch build for EPEL7:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=21108666

COPR build for f25, f26:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/decathorpe/golang-staging/build/588022/


My question from Comment #20 is still open.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1464194] Review Request: Framework dependency package for supporting ixpdimm_sw which installs the CLI , CIM and the I18N frameworks

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1464194



--- Comment #7 from Rutvij Karkhanis  ---
We are working on creating a submodule.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1434746] Review Request: uom-se - Unit Standard (JSR 363) implementation for Java SE 8 and above

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434746

Lukas Berk  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #2 from Lukas Berk  ---
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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "BSD (3 clause)", "Unknown or generated". 30 files have unknown
 license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/lberk/src/fedora-
 scm/review/review-uom-se/licensecheck.txt
Reviewing these unknown files: There are a variety of internalization property
files, META-INF files and config files I wouldn't expect to include licenses. 
Multiple .java source code files which do contain proper licensing (which I'm
not sure why fedora-review didn't pick up as BSD-3), as well as the pom.xml and
readme which also contain mention of the proper license.  Passing this section.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[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.
[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.
[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. 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: No rpmlint messages.
[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

Java:
[x]: Bundled jar/class files should be removed before build
[x]: Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
 Note: Maven packages do not need to (Build)Require jpackage-utils. It
 is pulled in by maven-local
[x]: Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
 subpackage
[x]: Javadoc subpackages should not have Requires: jpackage-utils
[x]: Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlink)

Maven:
[x]: If package contains pom.xml files install it (including metadata) even
 when building with ant
[x]: POM files have correct Maven mapping
[x]: Maven packages should use new style packaging
[x]: Old add_to_maven_depmap macro is not being used
[x]: Packages DO NOT have Requires(post) and 

[Bug 1434746] Review Request: uom-se - Unit Standard (JSR 363) implementation for Java SE 8 and above

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434746



--- Comment #1 from Lukas Berk  ---
Updated SPEC: https://bintray.com/pcp/f26/download_file?file_path=uom-se.spec
Updated SRPM:
https://bintray.com/pcp/f26/download_file?file_path=uom-se-1.0.4-3.fc26.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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1478052] Review Request: nuvola-app-google-play-music - Google Calendar web app for Nuvola Player 3

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1478052

Vít Ondruch  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #2 from Vít Ondruch  ---
* Wrong license in .metainfo.xml
  - The .metainfo.xml should specify just BSD-2-Clause.

Otherwise the package 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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1178361] Review Request: stuntrally - Stunt Rally game with Track Editor, based on VDrift and OGRE

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1178361
Bug 1178361 depends on bug 1298316, which changed state.

Bug 1298316 Summary: error: 'class Forests::PagedGeometry' has no member named 
'getTempDir'
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1298316

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |EOL



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1478052] Review Request: nuvola-app-google-play-music - Google Calendar web app for Nuvola Player 3

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1478052

Vít Ondruch  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|vondr...@redhat.com
  Flags||fedora-review?



--- Comment #1 from Vít Ondruch  ---
I'll take this for a 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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1288739] Review Request: petpvc - Tools for partial volume correction (PVC) in positron emission tomography (PET)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1288739
Bug 1288739 depends on bug 1291010, which changed state.

Bug 1291010 Summary: [ARM] terminate called after throwing an instance of 
'std::length_error'
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1291010

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |EOL



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1285112] Review Request: DiffusionKurtosisFit - Code to reconstruct the Diffusion Kurtosis Tensor from Diffusion Weighted MRI

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1285112
Bug 1285112 depends on bug 1291010, which changed state.

Bug 1291010 Summary: [ARM] terminate called after throwing an instance of 
'std::length_error'
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1291010

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |EOL



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1279176] Review Request: isis - Framework to access a large variety of image processing libraries

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1279176
Bug 1279176 depends on bug 1291010, which changed state.

Bug 1291010 Summary: [ARM] terminate called after throwing an instance of 
'std::length_error'
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1291010

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |EOL



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1279579] Review Request: itktools - Practical command line tools based on the ITK

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1279579
Bug 1279579 depends on bug 1291010, which changed state.

Bug 1291010 Summary: [ARM] terminate called after throwing an instance of 
'std::length_error'
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1291010

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |EOL



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1467054] Review Request: nuvola-app-google-calendar - Google Calendar web app for Nuvola Player 3

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1467054

Vít Ondruch  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #5 from Vít Ondruch  ---
Thanks. The package looks good now => 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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1228942] Review Request: python-frappe - Meta data driven web framework

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1228942
Bug 1228942 depends on bug 1249010, which changed state.

Bug 1249010 Summary: the package nodejs-js-beautify doesn't pack the python 
library from the same source code
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1249010

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |EOL



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1476589] Review Request: deepin-api - Go-lang bingding for dde-daemon

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1476589



--- Comment #5 from sensor@gmail.com ---
SPEC: 
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/mosquito/deepin/fedora-25-x86_64/00587960-deepin-api/deepin-api.spec
SRPM: 
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/mosquito/deepin/fedora-25-x86_64/00587960-deepin-api/deepin-api-3.1.11-2.fc25.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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1198760] Review Request: mitmproxy - An interactive SSL-capable intercepting HTTP proxy

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1198760
Bug 1198760 depends on bug 1249010, which changed state.

Bug 1249010 Summary: the package nodejs-js-beautify doesn't pack the python 
library from the same source code
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1249010

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |EOL



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1427634] Review Request: syncthing - Continuous File Synchronization

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1427634



--- Comment #20 from Fabio Valentini  ---
Updated .spec and SRPM files for the newest 0.14.34 upstream release:

Spec URL: https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/packages/syncthing.spec

SRPM URL:
https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/packages/syncthing-0.14.34-1.fc26.src.rpm

koji scratch build for rawhide:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=21106043

koji scratch build for EPEL7:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=21106229

COPR build for f25, f26:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/decathorpe/golang-staging/build/587953/


There's just one question from my side:
Should I include Provides: bundled(golang(XXX)) for the RHEL7 build, where the
.spec is currently using bundled 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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1434578] Review Request: gtef - GTK+ Text Editor Framework

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434578



--- Comment #12 from Kalev Lember  ---
Excellent, thanks for the 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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1434578] Review Request: gtef - GTK+ Text Editor Framework

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434578

c72...@yahoo.de changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #11 from c72...@yahoo.de ---
Package OK
Koji scratch build:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=21106726

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1434578] Review Request: gtef - GTK+ Text Editor Framework

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434578



--- Comment #10 from c72...@yahoo.de ---
Package Review
==

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


Issues:
===
- All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
  are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
  Note: These BR are not needed: gcc
  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2
# See comment 9 above

= 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]: 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.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.

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: "GPL", "GPL (v3 or later)", "Unknown or generated", "MIT/X11
 (BSD like)", "*No copyright* LGPL", "LGPL (v2.1 or later)", "FSF All
 Permissive". 139 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
 licensecheck in /home/makerpm/fedora-
 review/1434578-gtef/licensecheck.txt
[-]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
 Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/share/gir-1.0(gobject-
 introspection-devel, libgee-devel, gtk3-devel, atk-devel, gdk-
 pixbuf2-devel, gspell-devel), /usr/share/gtk-doc(harfbuzz-devel,
 libsecret-devel, gtk-doc, gtkspell3-devel), /usr/share/vala/vapi(vala,
 gspell-devel, gtksourceview3-devel, libgee-devel), /usr/libexec
 /installed-tests(graphene-tests, gdk-pixbuf2-tests, gvfs-tests,
 glib2-tests), /usr/share/installed-tests(gnome-weather-tests,
 libmediaart-tests, eog-tests, dbus-tests, gtk3-tests, cjs-tests,
 evolution-tests, glib2-tests, gvfs-tests, gnome-photos-tests, glib-
 networking-tests, clutter-tests, json-glib-tests, gnome-
 desktop3-tests, gdk-pixbuf2-tests, evolution-data-server-tests, pango-
 tests, gjs-tests), /usr/share/gtk-doc/html(harfbuzz-devel, libsecret-
 devel, gtk-doc, gtkspell3-devel), /usr/lib64/girepository-1.0(gspell,
 libgepub, gnome-autoar, libgee, libzapojit, gsound, libchamplain,
 gobject-introspection, GConf2, vte, libgnome-keyring, libgtop2, gdk-
 pixbuf2, gcr, libxklavier, libgdata, gtk2, gtk3, gnome-bluetooth-libs,
 grilo, gfbgraph, atk, libpeas, vte291, gnome-online-accounts),
 /usr/share/vala(vala, gspell-devel, gtksourceview3-devel, libgee-
 devel)
[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.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: The spec file handles locales properly.
[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 20480 bytes in 3 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 must own all directories that it creates.
[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.

[Bug 1466961] Review Request: datamash - A statistical, numerical and textual operations tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466961



--- Comment #15 from José Matos  ---
Now that the package is approved the author suggests that a new release (1.2)
will follow soon. :-)

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1476589] Review Request: deepin-api - Go-lang bingding for dde-daemon

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1476589



--- Comment #4 from sensor@gmail.com ---
Diff: 
https://github.com/FZUG/repo/commit/beffb7e08c0dd0cb99167dd24a544a33932cb070

> This will fail the mock build because network access is not available at 
> build time and these downloaded library become undesirably bundled into the 
> application.
Reference:http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Build_time_network_access
Fixed

> It seems that github.com/howeyc/fsnotify is no longer actively maintained. 
> Please switch to golang-github-go-fsnotify-fsnotify package if possible.
The golang-github-go-fsnotify-fsnotify is not work with deepin-api.

> If it is necessary for these icon to display properly immediately after 
> installation, please write a %post script let to refresh icon cache. Please 
> reference 
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Scriptlets?rd=Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Icon_Cache
>  for detail
Fixed

> Perhaps some  %post,%preun and %postun script lets are necessary for handling 
> systemd units. Please reference
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Systemd
Fixed

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1466961] Review Request: datamash - A statistical, numerical and textual operations tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466961

José Matos  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #14 from José Matos  ---
The package is approved.
The details follow:

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]: Provides: bundled(gnulib) in place as required.
[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.
[-]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
 Note: Dirs in package are owned also by:
 /usr/share/bash-completion
 (unar, kmod, licensecheck, libmbim, rpmdevtools,
 python2-pip, rpmlint, libqmi, ModemManager, bash-completion, tracker,
 yum, dnf, python3-pip, fedpkg, cmake-data, glib2, git-core, lightdm),
 /usr/share/bash-completion/completions(unar, kmod, licensecheck,
 libmbim, rpmdevtools, python2-pip, rpmlint, libqmi, ModemManager,
 firewalld, libappstream-glib, dnf, tracker, yum, bash-completion,
 python3-pip, fedpkg, cmake-data, glib2, git-core, lightdm)
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[ ]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
 Note: rm -rf %{buildroot} present but not required
[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]: Texinfo files are installed using install-info in %post and %preun if
 package has .info files.
 Note: Texinfo .info file(s) in datamash
[x]: The spec file handles locales properly.
[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 71680 bytes in 7 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 must own all directories that it creates.
[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]: 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 

[Bug 1344276] Review Request: gdeploy - Tool to deploy GlusterFS clusters and other utilities

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1344276

Niels de Vos  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
   Assignee|ktdre...@ktdreyer.com   |nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Flags|needinfo?(ktdreyer@ktdreyer |
   |.com)   |



--- Comment #27 from Niels de Vos  ---
Following
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews#Reviewer_not_responding
and resetting the status of the review back to the defaults.

Comment #23 contains a mostly reviewed status of the package. Reviewing this
should be straight forward now (Sac needs a sponsor too).

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1479022] Review Request: preeny - Some helpful preload libraries for pwning stuff

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1479022



--- Comment #3 from Jaroslav Škarvada  ---
(In reply to Ye Cheng from comment #1)
> (In reply to Jaroslav Škarvada from comment #0)
> 
> This is an unofficial review.
> 
> Issues:
> ===
> - All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
>   are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
>   Note: These BR are not needed: coreutils gcc make
>   See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2
False positives according to current rules all requirements has to be listed.

> - Directories without known owners: /usr/lib64/preeny
Fixed

> Please add %{_libdir}/%{name} to /etc/ld.so.conf.d/ (and run ldconfig) if it
> is intended for ld to find the installed libraries.
It's not intended, it's meant to be used by LD_PRELOAD

> - %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
>  Note : %{?__global_ldflags} Linker flag relro and now may alter the
> behaviour of the application being debugged but now linker flag could
> potentially help to reveal the issue earlier. Addition of
> LDFLAGS="%{?__global_ldflags}" doesn't break the compilation.
Fixed

> - %check is present and all tests pass.
> Upstream shipped 3 tests in /tests directory.
They are not tests, but more like examples, i.e. there is no test/check rule in
the Makefiles, it can just compile the sources in the tests directory, some
test logic has to be written. Also I think this "examples" are useless for
regular user, thus not including them.

> - Requires correct, justified where necessary.
> libini_config is required (but not listed) at runtime. 
This was caused by wrong build procedure, it should be fixed now and all
runtime deps coulb be automatically picked by rpmbuild.

New version:
Spec URL: https://jskarvad.fedorapeople.org/preeny/preeny.spec
SRPM URL: https://jskarvad.fedorapeople.org/preeny/preeny-0.1-2.fc25.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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1469767] Review Request: systemd-swap - Creating hybrid swap space from zram swaps, swap files and swap partitions

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1469767

František Zatloukal  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1341662




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1341662
[Bug 1341662] Review Request: fedora-developer-portal - Offline Fedora
Developer Portal
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1341662] Review Request: fedora-developer-portal - Offline Fedora Developer Portal

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1341662

František Zatloukal  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Depends On||1469767




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1469767
[Bug 1469767] Review Request: systemd-swap - Creating hybrid swap space
from zram swaps, swap files and swap partitions
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1479022] Review Request: preeny - Some helpful preload libraries for pwning stuff

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1479022



--- Comment #2 from Jaroslav Škarvada  ---
(In reply to Ye Cheng from comment #1)
Thanks, I am going to address the problems in next version.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1469767] Review Request: systemd-swap - Creating hybrid swap space from zram swaps, swap files and swap partitions

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1469767

František Zatloukal  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||fzatl...@redhat.com



--- Comment #3 from František Zatloukal  ---
Requires: kernel >= 2.6.37.1 # Remove kernel version check, it's not possible
to install such an ancient kernel in Fedora. Also, you should depend on one of
the kernel packages, not "kernel" itself.

Replace: 
> BuildRequires: systemd-units
> 
> Requires(post): systemd-sysv
> Requires(post): systemd-units
> Requires(preun): systemd-units
> Requires(postun): systemd-units
> 
> Requires: systemd

with

> %{?systemd_requires}
> BuildRequires: systemd

You have wrong service name: mkzram.service should be systemd-swap.service .
(mkzram.service does not exist in this package).


Package Review
==

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



= MUST items =

Generic:
[ ]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[ ]: 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/fanys/review/1469767-systemd-
 swap/licensecheck.txt
[ ]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[ ]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[ ]: 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.
[ ]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[ ]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[ ]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[ ]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[ ]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[ ]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[ ]: 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: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[ ]: 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]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified.
[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]: No %config files under /usr.
[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.
[ ]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[ ]: Package functions as described.
[ ]: Latest version is packaged.
[ ]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[ ]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
 justified.
[ ]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file 

[Bug 1434578] Review Request: gtef - GTK+ Text Editor Framework

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434578



--- Comment #9 from Kalev Lember  ---
Thanks! I've updated it to 2.0.1.

The gcc BR is not strictly necessary as it's currently included in the default
buildroot, but the packaging guidelines say that this can change over time and
we should not rely on anything else beside RPM being there. Quoting: "You may
assume that enough of an environment exists for RPM to function, to build
packages and execute basic shell scripts, but you should not assume any other
packages are present as RPM dependencies and anything brought into the
buildroot by the build system may change over time."

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Build-Time_Dependencies_.28BuildRequires.29

Spec URL: https://kalev.fedorapeople.org/gtef.spec
SRPM URL: http://kalev.fedorapeople.org/gtef-2.0.1-1.fc26.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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1479022] Review Request: preeny - Some helpful preload libraries for pwning stuff

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1479022

Ondřej Lysoněk  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||olyso...@redhat.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|olyso...@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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1479027] Review Request: golang-github-golang-image - Go supplementary image libraries

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1479027

Fabio Valentini  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||decatho...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|decatho...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review?



--- Comment #1 from Fabio Valentini  ---
Taking this review.

Since this package doesn't build yet, I suggest we block this review until
golang(golang.org/x/text) gets updated to the necessary commit?

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1479280] Review Request: python-jieba - Chinese Words Segementation Utilities

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1479280

Ye Cheng <18969068...@163.com> 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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1479280] New: Review Request: python-jieba - Chinese Words Segementation Utilities

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1479280

Bug ID: 1479280
   Summary: Review Request:python-jieba - Chinese Words
Segementation Utilities
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: 18969068...@163.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/yecheng/python-jieba/fedora-rawhide-i386/00587907-python-jieba/python-jieba.spec
SRPM URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/yecheng/python-jieba/fedora-rawhide-i386/00587907-python-jieba/python-jieba-0.38-1.fc27.src.rpm
Description: Python Chinese word segmentation module
Fedora Account System Username: yecheng

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1336161] Review Request: golang-github-ThomsonReutersEikon-go-ntlm - Native implementation of NTLM for Go

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1336161



--- Comment #3 from Igor Gnatenko  ---
(In reply to clime from comment #2)
> Can this be pushed? Or do you want to hand it over, Igor?
Please, someone take over this ;)

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1336168] Review Request: git-lfs - Git extension for versioning large files

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1336168
Bug 1336168 depends on bug 1336159, which changed state.

Bug 1336159 Summary: Review Request: golang-github-rubyist-tracerx - Output 
tracing information in your Go app based on environment variables
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1336159

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1336159] Review Request: golang-github-rubyist-tracerx - Output tracing information in your Go app based on environment variables

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1336159

Igor Gnatenko  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2017-08-08 04:43:09



--- Comment #4 from Igor Gnatenko  ---
Actually this is in rawhide for quite long time.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1479022] Review Request: preeny - Some helpful preload libraries for pwning stuff

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1479022

Ye Cheng <18969068...@163.com> changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||18969068...@163.com



--- Comment #1 from Ye Cheng <18969068...@163.com> ---
(In reply to Jaroslav Škarvada from comment #0)

This is an unofficial review.

Issues:
===
- All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
  are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
  Note: These BR are not needed: coreutils gcc make
  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2
- Directories without known owners: /usr/lib64/preeny
The directory is supposed to be owned by this package.
Please add %{_libdir}/%{name} to /etc/ld.so.conf.d/ (and run ldconfig) if it is
intended for ld to find the installed libraries.
- %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
 Note : %{?__global_ldflags} Linker flag relro and now may alter the
behaviour of the application being debugged but now linker flag could
potentially help to reveal the issue earlier. Addition of
LDFLAGS="%{?__global_ldflags}" doesn't break the compilation.
- %check is present and all tests pass.
Upstream shipped 3 tests in /tests directory.
- Requires correct, justified where necessary.
libini_config is required (but not listed) at runtime. 

= MUST items =

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[!]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
 Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
 attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
Please ignore this, because it will be quite tedious for user to type the full
versioned soname and parallel installation of multiple version will be rare.
The missing soname will unlikely become a issue because this library can be
linked manually by path.
[-]: 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: "BSD (2 clause)", "Unknown or generated". 23 files have unknown
 license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
 ~/1479022-preeny/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
 Note: No known owner of /usr/lib64/preeny
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib64/preeny
[!]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
 Note : global_ldflags not honored.
[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.
[?]: 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.
[x]: 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 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 

[Bug 1474033] Review Request: ucx - Communication library implementing high-performance messaging

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1474033



--- Comment #5 from Andrey Maslennikov  ---
Koji build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=21104781

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1476589] Review Request: deepin-api - Go-lang bingding for dde-daemon

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1476589

Ye Cheng <18969068...@163.com> changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||18969068...@163.com



--- Comment #3 from Ye Cheng <18969068...@163.com> ---
(In reply to sensor.wen from comment #2)
> SPEC: 
> https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/mosquito/deepin/fedora-26-
> x86_64/00586135-deepin-api/deepin-api.spec

>go get github.com/disintegration/imaging \
>github.com/howeyc/fsnotify \
>gopkg.in/check.v1 \
>gopkg.in/alecthomas/kingpin.v2
This will fail the mock build because network access is not available at build
time and these downloaded library become undesirably bundled into the
application.
Reference:http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Build_time_network_access

It seems that github.com/howeyc/fsnotify is no longer actively maintained.
Please switch to golang-github-go-fsnotify-fsnotify package if possible.

>%{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/*/actions/*
If it is necessary for these icon to display properly immediately after
installation, please write a %post script let to refresh icon cache. Please
reference
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Scriptlets?rd=Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Icon_Cache
for detail

>%{_unitdir}/*.service
Perhaps some  %post,%preun and %postun script lets are necessary for handling
systemd units. Please reference
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Systemd

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org