[Bug 879928] Review Request: rigsofrods - Vehicle simulator based on soft-body physics

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=879928

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|POST
  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #24 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
All ok then, package accepted.

-- 
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 879928] Review Request: rigsofrods - Vehicle simulator based on soft-body physics

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=879928



--- Comment #23 from Pavel Alexeev  ---
Ok.

Koji scratch build:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=22870369
Changes:
https://github.com/Hubbitus/rpm-rigsofrods/commit/c7452f8d96077fb72ab1292a33a23d6cc98f2ba2
Spec:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Hubbitus/rpm-rigsofrods/c7452f8d96077fb72ab1292a33a23d6cc98f2ba2/rigsofrods.spec
Srpm:
http://rpm.hubbitus.info/Fedora26/rigsofrods/rigsofrods-0.4.7.0-5.fc28.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 1508002] Review Request: utox - The lightweight Tox client

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1508002



--- Comment #3 from Sandro Mani  ---
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "BSD (2 clause)", "Unknown or generated".
 343 files have unknown license.

=> The license should be MIT according to uTox-0.16.1/LICENSE


[!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
 Note: No known owner of /usr/share/icons/hicolor/14x14,
 /usr/share/icons/hicolor/14x14/apps
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/icons/hicolor,
 /usr/share/icons/hicolor/14x14/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/14x14

=> hicolor icon theme does not provide the 14x14 directory, unless it is really
necessary I suppose you can also just delete that particular icon size.

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

[Bug 1509034] Review Request: phd2 - Telescope guiding software

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1509034

Mattia Verga  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||115 (Astronomy-SIG)




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=115
[Bug 115] Astronomy SIG - review tracker
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1509034] Review Request: phd2 - Telescope guiding software

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1509034



--- Comment #1 from Mattia Verga  ---
Koji scratch build:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=22869267

$ rpmlint SRPMS/phd2-2.6.4-1.fc28.src.rpm
RPMS/x86_64/phd2-2.6.4-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm
RPMS/x86_64/phd2-debuginfo-2.6.4-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm
RPMS/x86_64/phd2-debugsource-2.6.4-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm 
phd2.src: W: strange-permission generate-tarball.sh 775
phd2.src: W: invalid-url Source0: phd2-2.6.4-purged.tar.xz
phd2.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
phd2.x86_64: W: no-documentation
phd2.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary phd2
phd2-debugsource.x86_64: W: no-documentation
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings.

-- 
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 1509034] New: Review Request: phd2 - Telescope guiding software

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1509034

Bug ID: 1509034
   Summary: Review Request: phd2 - Telescope guiding software
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: mattia.ve...@email.it
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: https://mattia.fedorapeople.org/phd2.spec
SRPM URL: https://mattia.fedorapeople.org/phd2-2.6.4-1.fc28.src.rpm
Description: PHD2 is telescope guiding software that simplifies the process of
tracking a guide star, letting you concentrate on other aspects of deep-sky
imaging or spectroscopy.
Fedora Account System Username: mattia

-- 
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 1506949] Review Request: psblas3 - Parallel Sparse Basic Linear Algebra Subroutines

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506949



--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System  ---
psblas3-3.5.0-9.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2017-f57eacdeb5

-- 
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 1506949] Review Request: psblas3 - Parallel Sparse Basic Linear Algebra Subroutines

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506949



--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System  ---
psblas3-3.5.0-9.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-3b9640f9eb

-- 
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 1506949] Review Request: psblas3 - Parallel Sparse Basic Linear Algebra Subroutines

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506949

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

[Bug 1506949] Review Request: psblas3 - Parallel Sparse Basic Linear Algebra Subroutines

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506949



--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System  ---
psblas3-3.5.0-9.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-4605e211ee

-- 
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 1508384] Review Request: git-publish - Prepare and store patch revisions as git tags

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1508384



--- Comment #4 from Stefan Hajnoczi  ---
(In reply to Stefan Hajnoczi from comment #3)
> SRPM URL:
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/8886/22868886/git-publish-1.4-
> 1.fc26.noarch.rpm

Sorry, this should be the SRPM, not the binary RPM:

SRPM URL:
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/8886/22868886/git-publish-1.4-1.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 1508384] Review Request: git-publish - Prepare and store patch revisions as git tags

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1508384



--- Comment #3 from Stefan Hajnoczi  ---
I have address the feedback in Comment 1 and released git-publish 1.4 upstream
with Python 3 support:

Spec URL:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/stefanha/git-publish/master/git-publish.spec
SRPM URL:
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/8886/22868886/git-publish-1.4-1.fc26.noarch.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 1508020] Review Request: python-diff-cover - Automatically find diff lines that need test coverage

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1508020



--- Comment #2 from Randy Barlow  ---
Waiting on https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7129

-- 
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 1508016] Review Request: python-jinja2_pluralize - Jinja2 pluralize filters

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1508016



--- Comment #2 from Randy Barlow  ---
Waiting on https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7128

-- 
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 1501522] Review Request: fdk-aac - Third-Party Modified Version of the Fraunhofer FDK AAC Codec Library for Android

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1501522



--- Comment #46 from Christian Fredrik Kalager Schaller  
---
Anyway, if anyone wants any further legal review or discussion about the finer
details of the license here I suggest emailing Tom Callaway and not do it here
on this bugzilla. It is the wrong venue and form and anyone who is actually a
lawyer with a say here would never post any kind of evaluation or
recommendation to this bugzilla. I appologize for letting myself get enganged
in such discussion here despite knowing 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 1501522] Review Request: fdk-aac - Third-Party Modified Version of the Fraunhofer FDK AAC Codec Library for Android

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1501522



--- Comment #45 from Kevin Kofler  ---
See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Foundations#Freedom .

-- 
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 1501522] Review Request: fdk-aac - Third-Party Modified Version of the Fraunhofer FDK AAC Codec Library for Android

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1501522



--- Comment #44 from Kevin Kofler  ---
Even the introduction on:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Project_Wiki
says:
> They are developed in Fedora and produced under a free and open source license
> from inception, so other free software communities and projects are free to
> study, adopt, and modify them.

The authority on what constitutes a free software license is the FSF. The
authority on what constitutes an open source license is the OSI. If Red Hat
Legal is going to approve licenses without asking either of them or even
against their advice, the claim that the software in Fedora is "under a free
and open source license from inception" is false advertising.

-- 
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 1501522] Review Request: fdk-aac - Third-Party Modified Version of the Fraunhofer FDK AAC Codec Library for Android

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1501522



--- Comment #43 from Christian Fredrik Kalager Schaller  
---
(In reply to Kevin Kofler from comment #40)
> It is a Fedora policy that licenses allowed in Fedora must be free according
> to the FSF.
> 
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main also says:
> > This list is based on the licenses approved by the Free Software Foundation 
> > , OSI and consultation with Red Hat Legal.
> and all the licenses in the list so far:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main?rd=Licensing#Good_Licenses
> are approved by the FSF (in 2 cases, under certain conditions that are
> required to be satisfied for software under those licenses to be allowed in
> Fedora).
> 
> Approving a license considered non-free by the FSF would be a significant
> policy change that needs approval from the Council and that I am strongly
> opposed against (and I hope I am not the only one).


The policy does not actually state that all licenses has to be approved by the
FSF. It just says that when we considering a license for Fedora we look at
licenses approved by FSF, OSI and Red Hat legal. So in practice these 3 groups
are likely to agree on a license in the vast majority of cases and thus all
current licenses as you say are FSF approved, but the policy does not state
that FSF approval is a hard requirement.

-- 
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 1501522] Review Request: fdk-aac - Third-Party Modified Version of the Fraunhofer FDK AAC Codec Library for Android

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1501522



--- Comment #42 from Kevin Kofler  ---
Oh, and for the technical issues:

(In reply to Wim Taymans from comment #34)
> Comment #11: why not have fdk-aac-stripped?
>   - Looking at freetype, and because the library is API and ABI compatible,
> it's better to have fdk-aac as the base name for the -devel and -debug.
> That way all packages can build against the more natural fdk-aac-devel
> and have the -freeworld package enhance it at runtime.

You can build fdk-aac-{stripped,free,patentfree,whatever} and fdk-aac-devel
from the same package, either a fdk-aac.spec with no main package, or by using
%package -n, or by using a virtual Provides (Provides: fdk-aac-devel in the
%package devel of your fdk-aac-*.spec).

So I still don't think shipping this as just fdk-aac is helpful, both for
honesty to users and for upgrade path reasons. The model to follow is
gstreamer-plugins-bad-free, not freetype, which is the way it is for historical
reasons mostly.

But of course this discussion is absolutely moot if the license turns out not
to be acceptable to begin with. Debian's opinion does not per se count, but the
FSF needs to be asked.

-- 
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 1501522] Review Request: fdk-aac - Third-Party Modified Version of the Fraunhofer FDK AAC Codec Library for Android

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1501522



--- Comment #41 from Kevin Kofler  ---
See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:FAQ#Freedom

-- 
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 1501522] Review Request: fdk-aac - Third-Party Modified Version of the Fraunhofer FDK AAC Codec Library for Android

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1501522



--- Comment #40 from Kevin Kofler  ---
It is a Fedora policy that licenses allowed in Fedora must be free according to
the FSF.

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main also says:
> This list is based on the licenses approved by the Free Software Foundation , 
> OSI and consultation with Red Hat Legal.
and all the licenses in the list so far:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main?rd=Licensing#Good_Licenses
are approved by the FSF (in 2 cases, under certain conditions that are required
to be satisfied for software under those licenses to be allowed in Fedora).

Approving a license considered non-free by the FSF would be a significant
policy change that needs approval from the Council and that I am strongly
opposed against (and I hope I am not the only one).

-- 
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 1477363] Review Request: ocaml-cmdliner - Declarative definition of command line interfaces for OCaml

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1477363



--- Comment #14 from Ben Rosser  ---
No worries! There have been some review swap threads on devel@ recently and I
was just wondering if I should offer a swap for this review. I don't think
there's any great rush.

-- 
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 1477363] Review Request: ocaml-cmdliner - Declarative definition of command line interfaces for OCaml

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1477363

Richard W.M. Jones  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?(rjo...@redhat.com |
   |)   |



--- Comment #13 from Richard W.M. Jones  ---
I was, but if you have someone else lined up who can do it then
go ahead and ask them.  I have been super-busy, but could probably
do it next week.

-- 
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 1501522] Review Request: fdk-aac - Third-Party Modified Version of the Fraunhofer FDK AAC Codec Library for Android

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1501522



--- Comment #39 from Christian Fredrik Kalager Schaller  
---
Fedora Legal aka Red Hat legal has reviewed this license and is fine with it as
a free license. What the FSF or some random people at Debian thinks is of very
limited interest here.
So can we please stop playing laywer here and leave that to the actual lawyers.

As for the name of the rpmfusion package that will be up to rpmfusion and we
should not spend time discussing it here.

What we need to figure out here is how we package this code in Fedora and how
we can structure it in a way that allows other parties like rpmfusion to
enhance the offering if they are interested. I think Wims proposal addresses
that pretty 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 1477363] Review Request: ocaml-cmdliner - Declarative definition of command line interfaces for OCaml

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1477363

Ben Rosser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags||needinfo?(rjo...@redhat.com
   ||)



--- Comment #12 from Ben Rosser  ---
Sorry to nag, but it's been a while... are you still planning to finish 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 1503175] Review Request: thonny - Python IDE for beginners

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1503175



--- Comment #4 from Ben Rosser  ---
> Is it OK to leave the validation out?

If you add --nonet to the appstream-util command, it should work when ran
without internet access (as is the case when ran under mock). So, instead of:

> appstream-util validate-relax 
> %{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/metainfo/org.thonny.Thonny.appdata.xml

You can do this instead, and then it should be able to validate.

appstream-util validate-relax --nonet
%{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/metainfo/org.thonny.Thonny.appdata.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 1502200] Review Request: ghc-hxt - A collection of tools for processing XML with Haskell

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1502200

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #9 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
O then keep the docs in the main package.

-- 
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 1508002] Review Request: utox - The lightweight Tox client

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1508002

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|Review Request: uTox - The  |Review Request: utox - The
   |lightweight Tox client  |lightweight Tox client



--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
 - Done
 - I've elected to rename the package from uTox to utox


Spec URL:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/eclipseo/packaging/82987b1/utox.spec
SRPM URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/eclipseo/tox/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00657051-utox/utox-0.16.1-2.fc28.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 1508950] Review Request: eccodes - a library for decoding and encoding WMO data formats

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1508950

Jos de Kloe  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1461316




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1461316
[Bug 1461316] upstream ends in 2018
-- 
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 1508950] New: Review Request: eccodes - a library for decoding and encoding WMO data formats

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1508950

Bug ID: 1508950
   Summary: Review Request: eccodes - a library for decoding and
encoding WMO data formats
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: josdek...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: http://www.jdekloe.nl/Fedora/eccodes.spec
SRPM URL: http://www.jdekloe.nl/Fedora/eccodes-2.5.0-1.fc26.src.rpm

Description: 
ecCodes is a package developed by ECMWF which provides an application
programming interface and a set of tools for decoding and encoding messages
in the following formats:
 *  WMO FM-92 GRIB edition 1 and edition 2
 *  WMO FM-94 BUFR edition 3 and edition 4 
 *  WMO GTS abbreviated header (only decoding).
It includes set of command line tools to provide quick access to the messages,
and C, Fortran 90 and Python interfacess. ecCodes is an evolution of GRIB-API. 

Fedora Account System Username: jdekloe

Some extra notes:
* I owe a big thank you to Orion Poplawski who provided a first version of the
spec file that I could develop further.
* the srpm file is fairly large, 142MB, this is due to a very large number of
test data files that are tested during the check stage of the build. These data
files are currently not included in the final rpms for this package (which is
only about 4MB).
* the so file produced by this package is not versioned. An issue has been
raised upstream, see: https://software.ecmwf.int/issues/browse/SUP-1809 but
there is no response that anything is about to change there
* this package provides a replacement for gribapi, for which development will
be ended in 2018 by upstream, see
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1461316

-- 
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 1501522] Review Request: fdk-aac - Third-Party Modified Version of the Fraunhofer FDK AAC Codec Library for Android

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1501522



--- Comment #38 from Kevin Kofler  ---
If the FSF agrees with Debian the license is non-free, then this code is not
allowed in Fedora at all, neither as a package nor bundled anywhere else.

If the FSF says the license is free, then we should go with the FSF's
judgement.

-- 
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 1501522] Review Request: fdk-aac - Third-Party Modified Version of the Fraunhofer FDK AAC Codec Library for Android

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1501522



--- Comment #37 from Kevin Kofler  ---
If Fedora considers the copyright license free, RPM Fusion probably should,
too.

Please note, however, that Debian thinks that the license is non-free (see
comment #16) and that the FSF should probably be asked. (Last I checked, they
were not asked yet according to Spot.) I object to approving this package as
long as this is not done.

-- 
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 1501522] Review Request: fdk-aac - Third-Party Modified Version of the Fraunhofer FDK AAC Codec Library for Android

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1501522



--- Comment #36 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart)  ---
(In reply to Wim Taymans from comment #34)
...
> The fdk-aac-freeworld name isn't acceptable as the package is considered
> nonfree,
>  the name should be fdk-aac-nonfree

Can someone explain why the hell are you going to accept a non-free software
into Fedora in the first step ?

https://trac.ffmpeg.org/wiki/Encode/AAC, quoting:
"FFmpeg supports two AAC-LC encoders (aac and libfdk_aac) and one HE-AAC (v1/2)
encoder (libfdk_aac). The license of libfdk_aac is not compatible with GPL, so
the GPL does not permit distribution of binaries containing incompatible code
when GPL-licensed code is also included. Therefore this encoder have been
designated as "non-free", and you cannot download a pre-built ffmpeg that
supports it. This can be resolved by compiling ffmpeg yourself. "

In others words, we are talking about having a nonfree software (fdk-aac) to
compete with a GPL compatible AAC-LC implementation provided by a FLOSS project
(ffmpeg) ? 

If gst (which is LGPL) wants to (<<

[Bug 879928] Review Request: rigsofrods - Vehicle simulator based on soft-body physics

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=879928



--- Comment #22 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
*** the cmake part should be in %build too ***

%build
cmake \
  -DROR_USE_MYGUI="TRUE" \
  -DROR_USE_OPENAL="TRUE" \
  -DROR_USE_PAGED="TRUE" \
  -DROR_USE_CAELUM="TRUE" \
  -DROR_USE_ANGELSCRIPT="FALSE" \
  -DROR_USE_SOCKETW="TRUE" \
  -DSOCKETW_INCLUDE_DIRS:PATH="%{_includedir}/SocketW" \
  -DPAGED_INCLUDE_DIRS:PATH="%{_includedir}/OGRE" \
  -MYGUI_INCLUDE_DIRS:PATH="%{_includedir}/OGRE/Overlay" \
  -DPAGED_LIBRARY_DIRS:PATH="%{_libdir}/OGRE" \
  -DPAGED_LIBRARIES=%{_libdir}/OGRE/libPagedGeometry.so \
  -DCAELUM_LIBRARIES=%{_libdir}/OGRE/libCaelum.so \
  -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Debug \
  -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=%{buildroot}%{_prefix} \
  \
  .
make %{?_smp_mflags}

-- 
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 925993] Review Request: ghc-yesod-core - Yesod core library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=925993



--- Comment #16 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ghc-yesod-core

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
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 1505076] Review Request: php-vlucas-phpdotenv - Loads environment variables from .env

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1505076



--- Comment #5 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/php-vlucas-phpdotenv

-- 
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 1505084] Review Request: php-pda-pheanstalk - PHP client for beanstalkd queue

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1505084



--- Comment #5 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/php-pda-pheanstalk

-- 
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 1506734] Review Request: php-amqplib - Pure PHP implementation of the AMQP protocol

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506734



--- Comment #7 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/php-amqplib

-- 
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 1505073] Review Request: php-symfony4 - Symfony PHP framework ( version 4)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1505073



--- Comment #4 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/php-symfony4

-- 
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 1506741] Review Request: php-stecman-symfony-console-completion - Automatic BASH completion for Symfony Console based applications

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506741



--- Comment #6 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/php-stecman-symfony-console-completion

-- 
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 1491216] Review Request: 5minute - Give me an instance of mine image on OpenStack

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1491216



--- Comment #15 from Neal Gompa  ---
Igor,

Upstream is not using tito, but they seem to be preparing tarballs by hand. The
tarball I get from GitHub doesn't match the SRPM tarball.

-- 
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 1501522] Review Request: fdk-aac - Third-Party Modified Version of the Fraunhofer FDK AAC Codec Library for Android

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1501522



--- Comment #35 from leigh scott  ---
(In reply to Wim Taymans from comment #34)
> What I propose is this:
> 
> - Have fdk-aac be the default stipped version of the aac codec that we
> include
>   in Fedora. The -devel packages etc will be fdk-aac-devel etc.. Similar to
>   freetype
> - Have fdk-aac-freeworld in rpmfusion that installs the same .so in
>   /usr/lib64/fdk-aac-freeworld/ and adds this path to /etc/ld.so.conf.d/
>   This is similar to freetype-freeworld, see comment #14, comment #15
> - make rpmfusion packages Require: fdk-aac-freeworld. This would make apps
>   installed from rpmfusion also pull in the -freeworld version with complete
>   functionality.


The fdk-aac-freeworld name isn't acceptable as the package is considered
nonfree,
 the name should be fdk-aac-nonfree

https://admin.rpmfusion.org/pkgdb/package/nonfree/fdk-aac/

-- 
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 1501522] Review Request: fdk-aac - Third-Party Modified Version of the Fraunhofer FDK AAC Codec Library for Android

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1501522



--- Comment #34 from Wim Taymans  ---
After some more thinking I think we need to try to achieve:

1) Be practical about what we can support and allow for tradeoffs between
   desired and allowed functionality.   
2) Keep it simple, don't try to patch too much stuff or be too clever, don't
   requires relinking or different versions of apps etc..
3) have things work somewhat reasonably by default in most cases
4) provide easy way to 'upgrade' to the real-but-non-free version if the user
   explicitly wants this

What I propose is this:

- Have fdk-aac be the default stipped version of the aac codec that we include
  in Fedora. The -devel packages etc will be fdk-aac-devel etc.. Similar to
  freetype
- Have fdk-aac-freeworld in rpmfusion that installs the same .so in
  /usr/lib64/fdk-aac-freeworld/ and adds this path to /etc/ld.so.conf.d/
  This is similar to freetype-freeworld, see comment #14, comment #15
- make rpmfusion packages Require: fdk-aac-freeworld. This would make apps
  installed from rpmfusion also pull in the -freeworld version with complete
  functionality.

Practically:
  gstreamer1-plugins-bad would build against fdk-aac-devel and play a subset of
  aac files with full quality and others with reduced quality. Other apps can
  do the same. Installing the -freeworld package enables full quality in all
  apps.

Updates SPEC and SRPMS with fixes for above review:

https://people.freedesktop.org/~wtay/SPECS/fdk-aac.spec
https://people.freedesktop.org/~wtay/SRPMS/fdk-aac-0.1.5-4.fc26.src.rpm


Some answers:

Comment #11: why not have fdk-aac-stripped?
  - Looking at freetype, and because the library is API and ABI compatible,
it's better to have fdk-aac as the base name for the -devel and -debug.
That way all packages can build against the more natural fdk-aac-devel and
have the -freeworld package enhance it at runtime.

Comment #12: yay, we can enable it in ffmpeg
  - build against fdk-aac and require fdk-aac-freeworld to pull in the full
version when installing ffmpeg from rpmfusion.

Comment #22 ffmpeg fails with fdk-aac!
  - ffmpeg would be installed from rpmfusion and pull in the fdk-aac-freeworld
package and thus would work correctly because it decodes and encodes with
full quality.

Comment #7, Comment #31 it doesn't do everything, why bother?
Comment #25, it doesn't work as advertised, convince me..
  - The argument is that we can decode all AAC files, some with reduced
quality/functionality (not unlike the reduced quality of freetype,
albeit arguably more noticeable by non-experts). The path to full
quality is the same as it was before. On a scale from 0 to 10 we go
from a solid 0 to a positive score >0, which is an infinite increase
in betterness :).
  - The question of "why doesn't this sound as good as it does on $OTHER_OS"
is the same as "why do my fonts look so much worse than on $OTHER_OS". It
can be an educational moment instead of something to avoid.

Comments that fail rule 2:
  Comment #20, Comment #21, Comment #27
  patching GStreamer elements or parsers to somehow force the installation of
  fdk-aac-freeworld.
  - Arguably we could then even put the automatic installation of the library
inside the stripped fdk-aac library when it detects reduced functionality
and have things work outside of GStreamer as well. We could add a
Provides: fdk-aac-full in the rmpfusion version and ask the installer to
install something that provides fdk-aac-full, or something like 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 1503175] Review Request: thonny - Python IDE for beginners

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1503175



--- Comment #3 from Aivar Annamaa  ---
Thanks a lot, Ben!

I added desktop file, man page and AppData file to the upstream sdist, changed
the Source0 and added icon installation.

The result is here: 

* https://bitbucket.org/plas/thonny-rpm/downloads/thonny.spec
* https://bitbucket.org/plas/thonny-rpm/downloads/thonny-2.1.14-1.fc26.src.rpm

PS. I tried also validating the AppData file in %install section (
https://bitbucket.org/plas/thonny-rpm/src/c15b8b97a1af5d58c28d695b51de57c2df609bb0/thonny.spec?fileviewer=file-view-default#thonny.spec-42
), but then mock complained about not finding the screenshot files. Looks like
it simply ran without internet access. Is it OK to leave the validation out?

-- 
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 1506011] Review Request: nm-tray - NetworkManager tray icon

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506011



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
nm-tray-0.3.0-2.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-25cbfe5485

-- 
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 1506011] Review Request: nm-tray - NetworkManager tray icon

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506011

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

[Bug 1506011] Review Request: nm-tray - NetworkManager tray icon

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506011



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
nm-tray-0.3.0-2.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-08570ddc92

-- 
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 1508064] Review Request: golang-github-chzyer-logex - A golang log lib, supports tracking and level, wrap by standard log lib

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1508064

Jared Smith  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|POST
  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #1 from Jared Smith  ---
Package is approved.


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: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "Unknown or generated". 7 files have
 unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
 /home/jsmith/Documents/Personal/Reviews/1508064-golang-github-chzyer-
 logex/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/gocode/src,
 /usr/share/gocode, /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com
[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]: 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.
[-]: 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]: 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]: 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).
[?]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
 Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in golang-
 github-chzyer-logex-devel , golang-github-chzyer-logex-unit-test-devel
[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]: %check is present 

[Bug 1507997] Review Request: gnome-video-arcade - simple MAME front-end

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1507997



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
gnome-video-arcade-0.8.8-1.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-89e42e75cb

-- 
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 1507997] Review Request: gnome-video-arcade - simple MAME front-end

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1507997



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
gnome-video-arcade-0.8.8-1.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-1054855589

-- 
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 1508064] Review Request: golang-github-chzyer-logex - A golang log lib, supports tracking and level, wrap by standard log lib

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1508064

Jared Smith  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||jsmith.fed...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jsmith.fed...@gmail.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 1507997] Review Request: gnome-video-arcade - simple MAME front-end

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1507997

Matthew Barnes  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2017-11-02 07:02:04



--- Comment #6 from Matthew Barnes  ---
Packages built for rawhide, f26, and f27.

-- 
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 1358744] Review Request: globus-gridftp-server-google-drive - Globus Toolkit - GridFTP Google Drive DSI

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1358744

Mattias Ellert  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Last Closed||2017-11-02 04:42:06



--- Comment #1 from Mattias Ellert  ---
The Globus Toolkit will no longer be supported by the original developers from
January 2018, and this package is not likely to be maintained by the Grid
Computing Forum that will take over maintenance of the main parts of the
toolkit.

I therefore withdraw this review request.

-- 
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 1358743] Review Request: globus-dsi-rest - Globus Toolkit - Globus DSI Rest Helper API

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1358743

Mattias Ellert  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Last Closed||2017-11-02 04:42:04



--- Comment #1 from Mattias Ellert  ---
The Globus Toolkit will no longer be supported by the original developers from
January 2018, and this package is not likely to be maintained by the Grid
Computing Forum that will take over maintenance of the main parts of the
toolkit.

I therefore withdraw this review request.

-- 
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 1358744] Review Request: globus-gridftp-server-google-drive - Globus Toolkit - GridFTP Google Drive DSI

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1358744
Bug 1358744 depends on bug 1358743, which changed state.

Bug 1358743 Summary: Review Request: globus-dsi-rest - Globus Toolkit - Globus 
DSI Rest Helper API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1358743

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |WONTFIX



-- 
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 1341498] Review Request: globus-gridftp-server-s3 - Globus Toolkit - GridFTP S3 DSI

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1341498

Mattias Ellert  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Last Closed||2017-11-02 04:42:00



--- Comment #2 from Mattias Ellert  ---
The Globus Toolkit will no longer be supported by the original developers from
January 2018, and this package is not likely to be maintained by the Grid
Computing Forum that will take over maintenance of the main parts of the
toolkit.

I therefore withdraw this review request.

-- 
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 1491216] Review Request: 5minute - Give me an instance of mine image on OpenStack

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1491216



--- Comment #14 from Igor Gnatenko  ---
Does upstream use tito? Do you use tito to prepare tarball / srpm? This might
be hint where to look.

-- 
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 1491216] Review Request: 5minute - Give me an instance of mine image on OpenStack

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1491216



--- Comment #13 from Pavlina Moravcova Varekova  ---
When I tried to use:
> %autosetup -n %{name}-%{name}-%{version}
inside the spec file command
>rpmbuild -ba 5minute.spec
returned an error:
>
>+ STATUS=0
>+ '[' 0 -ne 0 ']'
>+ cd 5minute-5minute-0.2.18
>/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.DTVZAm: line 38: cd: 5minute-5minute-0.2.18: No such file or 
>directory
>
>
>RPM build errors:
>Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.uIHOOw (%prep)


With
> %autosetup -n %{name}-%{version}
command
> rpmbuild -ba 5minute.spec
worked correctly:
>
>+ STATUS=0
>+ '[' 0 -ne 0 ']'
>+ cd 5minute-0.2.18
>+ /usr/bin/chmod -Rf a+rX,u+w,g-w,o-w .
>+ exit 0
>

(I find the construction "-n %{name}-%{version}" in some existing spec files
e.g. vrms-rpm.spec, libvmi.spec, osmium-tool.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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 925993] Review Request: ghc-yesod-core - Yesod core library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=925993



--- Comment #15 from Jens Petersen  ---
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/2593
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/2594

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
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