[Bug 1543813] Review Request: pwkickstart - generate kickstart passwords

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1543813

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |MODIFIED



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1543813] Review Request: pwkickstart - generate kickstart passwords

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1543813



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
pwkickstart-1.0.2-2.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-a8b20677ea

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1546626] New: Review Request: nodejs-svgo - Nodejs-based tool for optimizing SVG vector graphics files

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1546626

Bug ID: 1546626
   Summary: Review Request: nodejs-svgo - Nodejs-based tool for
optimizing SVG vector graphics files
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: l...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/luya/svgo/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00717256-nodejs-svgo/nodejs-svgo.spec
SRPM URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/luya/svgo/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00717256-nodejs-svgo/nodejs-svgo-1.0.4-1.fc28.src.rpm
Description: SVG Optimizer is a Nodejs-based tool for optimizing SVG vector
graphics files. 
Fedora Account System Username: luya

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1481630] Review Request: virtualbox-guest-additions - VirtualBox Guest Additions

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1481630



--- Comment #66 from Sergio Monteiro Basto  ---
(In reply to Hans de Goede from comment #64)
> (In reply to Sergio Monteiro Basto from comment #63)
> > But , shared folder will work ? 
> 
> See comment 58.

I do not understood the comment 58 , do we need build vboxsf.ko or not to work
right now ? 

(In reply to Hans de Goede from comment #65)
> Ok, I've just imported virtualbox-guest-additions-5.2.6-4 (with one small
> fix over the last version posted here) and started a build for it for
> rawhide.
> 
> Please disable the guest-additions sub-package in the rpmfusion package.

In next iteration I will , is not a priority ... , everything still work
without any problem ...

> If you want to test this with vboxsf, here is a standalone version of vboxsf
> which will build against the vboxguest included in the 4.16-rc1+ kernels in
> rawhide:
> 
> https://github.com/jwrdegoede/vboxsf/

So this code , can be add to VirtualBox-kmodsrc-5.2.x ? to build vboxsf.ko ? 

But I remember back here because I have others question. We (RPMFusion) also
support epel7 and I remember to ask if you think have guest-additions on epel7
? and BTW if F27 also will have this package ?

ah (I almost forgot) and I'd like to know , please, if modules still in staging
or not , I'd like talk with Larry Finger from opensuse and a friend which is
the package maintainer of Debian and I don't know where the modules are, to
tell them ... 

IMHO this ticket should still open , to not lost the track ... 

Awesome work, best regards.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1491492] Review Request: Coturn - TURN/STUN & ICE Server

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1491492



--- Comment #3 from Christian Glombek  ---
The Spec has been updated.
Please review!
Please sponsor!

Spec URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/lorbus/coturn/fedora-27-x86_64/00717288-coturn/coturn.spec

SRPM URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/lorbus/coturn/fedora-27-x86_64/00717288-coturn/coturn-4.5.0.7-1.fc27.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 1544716] Review Request: golang-github-inconshreveable-go-vhost - HTTP/ TLS hostname multiplexing library for Go

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1544716



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
golang-github-inconshreveable-go-vhost-0-0.1.20160627git06d8411.fc26 has been
submitted as an update to Fedora 26.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-569ccc30be

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1544716] Review Request: golang-github-inconshreveable-go-vhost - HTTP/ TLS hostname multiplexing library for Go

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1544716



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
golang-github-inconshreveable-go-vhost-0-0.1.20160627git06d8411.fc27 has been
submitted as an update to Fedora 27.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-35d796c441

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1544716] Review Request: golang-github-inconshreveable-go-vhost - HTTP/ TLS hostname multiplexing library for Go

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1544716

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 1541566] Review Request: whipper - Python CD-DA ripper

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1541566

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 1541566] Review Request: whipper - Python CD-DA ripper

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1541566



--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System  ---
whipper-0.6.0-6.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-55d9cc8fb4

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1532042] Review Request: compton - Compositor for X11

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1532042



--- Comment #15 from James Paul Turner  ---
(In reply to Dominik Schubert from comment #13)
> (In reply to James Paul Turner from comment #12)
> > - I am unable to install compton without libconfig. Should libconfig be a
> >   'Requires', rather than a 'BuildRequires'?
> 
> I'm not quite sure what you mean. According to your output, compton already
> requires libconfig.so.9()(64bit) which is provided by libconfig.

Yes, you're quite right. I forgot that rpm, by itself, does not resolve
dependencies. Thank you.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1532042] Review Request: compton - Compositor for X11

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1532042



--- Comment #14 from Abhiram K <4kuch...@gmail.com> ---
(In reply to James Paul Turner from comment #12)
> - Package does not use a name that already exists.
>   Note: A package with this name already exists. Please check
>   https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/compton

That package has been orphaned. This review request was created in order for me
to un-orphan it and continue maintaining it. :D

I will look into the other issues you have mentioned and update as necessary.
Thank you for pointing them 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 1532042] Review Request: compton - Compositor for X11

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1532042



--- Comment #13 from Dominik Schubert  ---
(In reply to James Paul Turner from comment #12)
> - I am unable to install compton without libconfig. Should libconfig be a
>   'Requires', rather than a 'BuildRequires'?

I'm not quite sure what you mean. According to your output, compton already
requires libconfig.so.9()(64bit) which is provided by libconfig.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1532042] Review Request: compton - Compositor for X11

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1532042

James Paul Turner  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||jamesturner...@gmail.com



--- Comment #12 from James Paul Turner  ---
Note: the following review is by a non-packager-group member.
It was produced with help from fedora-review.


Package Review
==

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


Issues:
===

- I am unable to install compton without libconfig. Should libconfig be a
  'Requires', rather than a 'BuildRequires'?

- Package does not use a name that already exists.
  Note: A package with this name already exists. Please check
  https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/compton

- Changelog entries should include - to indicate which
  revision number a change applies to.

- Rpmlint warned that Changelog timestamps aren't sane (Feb 19 2018 was a
  Friday, not a Tuesday).


= MUST items =

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.

[!]: Changelog in prescribed format.

[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).

[!]: 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]: 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 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.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or
 desktop-file-validate if there is such a file.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package 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 compton-
 debuginfo , compton-debugsource
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text 

[Bug 1541566] Review Request: whipper - Python CD-DA ripper

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1541566



--- Comment #16 from William Moreno  ---
See the dos about setup.py you must add a setup.cfg with:

[build_ext]
inplace=1

To build c extensions in place, a good patch to send upstream.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1546534] Review Request: golang-github-paulrosania-go-charset - Character set conversion for Go

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1546534

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

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



--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
 - Comments about the patch shoud be just above the patch, not in %changelog:

# Changes /usr/local/lib/go-charset/datafiles
# to /usr/share/go-charset/datafiles to met the Fedora Packaging Guidelines
# requirements
Patch0: charsetdir-fedora-fix.patch
# fixes ill-formed format string  in fmt.Sprintf (charset/ascii.go) 
# and  forgotten  t.Fatalf  arguments (charset/charset_test.go)
Patch1: sprintf-fatalf-invalid-args-fix.patch

 - No need to give multiple SRPM, one is enough for thereview.

Package 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: "BSD (3 clause)", "Unknown or generated". 65 files have unknown
 license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review
 /golang-github-paulrosania-go-charset/review-golang-github-
 paulrosania-go-charset/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.
[-]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[-]: 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 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: 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 does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
 provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
 %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
 file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: 

[Bug 1546546] Review Request: electrum - updated to version 3.0.6 - first package need sponsor

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1546546

Itamar Reis Peixoto  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |NOTABUG
Last Closed||2018-02-18 11:58:32



--- Comment #2 from Itamar Reis Peixoto  ---
electrum is already on fedora.

please download the sources here, write a patch and file a pull request.

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/electrum

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1546546] Review Request: electrum - updated to version 3.0.6 - first package need sponsor

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1546546

Itamar Reis Peixoto  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||ita...@ispbrasil.com.br



--- Comment #1 from Itamar Reis Peixoto  ---
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1027072

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1546546] New: Review Request: electrum - updated to version 3.0.6 - first package need sponsor

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1546546

Bug ID: 1546546
   Summary: Review Request: electrum - updated to version 3.0.6 -
first package need sponsor
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: arrarexcarav...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL:
http://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/caravel/electrum/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00717131-electrum/electrum.spec

SRPM URL:
http://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/caravel/electrum/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00717131-electrum/electrum-3.0.6-1.fc28.src.rpm

Description:  updated to version 3.0.6

Fedora Account System Username: caravel

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1545919] Review Request: typelib-srpm-macros - gobject-introspection typelib sub-package generator macros

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1545919

Neal Gompa  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||ngomp...@gmail.com



--- Comment #4 from Neal Gompa  ---
So are we finally getting a typelib dependency generator?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1542522] Review Request: jsonnet - a data templating language

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1542522



--- Comment #9 from Itamar Reis Peixoto  ---
instead of


%if 0%{?fedora}
%files -n lib%{name}-python3
%{python3_sitearch}/*
%endif

use


%files -n lib%{name}-python%{python3_pkgversion}
%{python3_sitearch}/*


instead of

%package -n lib%{name}-python3

use
%package -n lib%{name}-python%{python3_pkgversion}

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1542522] Review Request: jsonnet - a data templating language

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1542522



--- Comment #8 from Itamar Reis Peixoto  ---
instead of 

BuildRequires: python3-devel

use

python%{python3_pkgversion}-devel

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1542522] Review Request: jsonnet - a data templating language

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1542522

Itamar Reis Peixoto  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||ita...@ispbrasil.com.br



--- Comment #7 from Itamar Reis Peixoto  ---
you don't need that 

%if 0%{?rhel}


just use BuildRequires: python2-setuptools and it will work on rhel 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 1546534] New: Review Request: golang-github-paulrosania-go-charset - Character set conversion for Go

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1546534

Bug ID: 1546534
   Summary: Review Request: golang-github-paulrosania-go-charset -
Character set conversion for Go
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: jkuc...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/i386x/golang-github-paulrosania-go-charset/master/golang-github-paulrosania-go-charset.spec
Patch0 URL:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/i386x/golang-github-paulrosania-go-charset/master/charsetdir-fedora-fix.patch
Patch1 URL:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/i386x/golang-github-paulrosania-go-charset/master/sprintf-fatalf-invalid-args-fix.patch
SRPM URL (rawhide):
https://github.com/i386x/golang-github-paulrosania-go-charset/raw/master/golang-github-paulrosania-go-charset-0-0.1.20151028git621bb39.fc28.src.rpm
SRPM URL (f27):
https://github.com/i386x/golang-github-paulrosania-go-charset/raw/master/golang-github-paulrosania-go-charset-0-0.1.20151028git621bb39.fc27.src.rpm
SRPM URL (f26):
https://github.com/i386x/golang-github-paulrosania-go-charset/raw/master/golang-github-paulrosania-go-charset-0-0.1.20151028git621bb39.fc26.src.rpm
Koji scratch build URL (rawhide):
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=25080606
Koji scratch build URL (f27):
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=25080649
Koji scratch build URL (f26):
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=25080803
Description: Character set conversion for Go
Fedora Account System Username: jkucera

Notes:
- this package is a dependency of [ github.com/elazarl/goproxy ], which is a
dependency of bettercap 2.0.0 [
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540726#c11 ]
- official upstream repo of the project was originally [
https://code.google.com/archive/p/go-charset/ ], but it is inactive for a long
time;
  [ github.com/paulrosania/go-charset ] is its mirror on [ github.com ] with
the most stars

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1546459] Review Request: svgo-inkscape - Extension to optimize SVG files for Inkscape

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1546459



--- Comment #3 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
(In reply to Luya Tshimbalanga from comment #2)
> > 
> >  - Second svgo.js depends on svgo itself, which is a node module. That's why
> > there is a package.json provided. You should thus run "npm install" in the
> > svgo-inkscape directory to install the required modules.
> 
> Looking at the nodejs guideline
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Node.js?rd=Node.js/
> Packagers#Installing_Modules, it looks like using "npm install" is
> discouraged. Is there a better method instead?

Yes my bad, internet is not available in Koji so this wouldn't work anyway.
What you need to do instead is to package the bundled modules:

 - nodejs-svgo

Use npm2rpm as a startup point. Look at other nodejs SPEC files to help you
(https://src.fedoraproject.org/group/nodejs-sig). I,ve checked and all the
dependencies are already packaged.

nodejs-minimist is already packaged too, just add npm(minimist) as a RR.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1546459] Review Request: svgo-inkscape - Extension to optimize SVG files for Inkscape

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1546459



--- Comment #2 from Luya Tshimbalanga  ---
(In reply to Robert-André Mauchin from comment #1)
> Hello.
> 
>  - Source0 is wrong, it should be:
> 
> Source0:   
> https://github.com/juanfran/svgo-inkscape/archive/v%{version}/%{name}-
> %{version}.tar.gz

Fixed

>  - You should ask upstream first to include a license file, not do it
> yourself. If upstream is unresponsive, then you might include it.

Already filed the request:
https://github.com/juanfran/svgo-inkscape/issues/6

>  - This does not replace shebangs, this change line encoding of the file!
> 
> #Replace shebangs line #!/usr/bin/env python
> sed -i 's/\r//' %{name}-%{version}/%{name}/svgo.inkscape.py
> 
>Just mark the file as executable and brp-mangle-shebangs will
> automatically do the rest:
> 
> chmod 0755 %{name}/svgo.inkscape.py

Fixed
> 
>  -  -c %{name} is not necessary in %autosetup
> 
>  - Then %install should be simplified to:
> 
> %install
> install -Dpm 0644 %{name}.inx -t %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/inkscape/extensions/
> cp -pr  %{name} -t %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/inkscape/extensions/
> 
> And %doc in %changelog:
> 
> %files
> %license LICENSE.txt
> %doc README.md
> 
>  - There's a mix of tabs and spaces used for indentation, use one or another
> not both.

Fixed.

> 
>  - This package won't work as intended: first if you read the Python source
> you see that it is expecting "node" in a subdirectory:
> 
> def effect(self):
> command = "./node/bin/node svgo.js --file=" + self.args[0]
> 
>This should be patched to depend on the system-wide node ( and you should
> thus add a Requires for it).

BuildRequires: nodejs-packaging seems the suggestion according to the
guideline.

> 
>  - Second svgo.js depends on svgo itself, which is a node module. That's why
> there is a package.json provided. You should thus run "npm install" in the
> svgo-inkscape directory to install the required modules.

Looking at the nodejs guideline
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Node.js?rd=Node.js/Packagers#Installing_Modules,
it looks like using "npm install" is discouraged. Is there a better method
instead?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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