[Bug 1566332] Review Request: ghc-doctest - Test interactive Haskell examples

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1566332



--- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade  ---
koji scratch build:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=26318309

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1566332] New: Review Request: ghc-doctest - Test interactive Haskell examples

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1566332

Bug ID: 1566332
   Summary: Review Request: ghc-doctest - Test interactive Haskell
examples
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: quantum.anal...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org




Spec URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//ghc-doctest.spec
SRPM URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//ghc-doctest-0.13.0-1.fc27.src.rpm

Description:
The doctest program checks examples in source code comments. It is modeled
after doctest for Python ().

Documentation is at .

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1557766] Review Request: libb2 - C library providing BLAKE2b, BLAKE2s , BLAKE2bp, BLAKE2sp

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1557766



--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System  ---
libb2-0.98-1.20171225git60ea749.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.

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

[Bug 1559388] Review Request: dep - Go dependency management tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1559388



--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System  ---
dep-0.4.1-1.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 stable repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

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

[Bug 1562519] Review Request: git-crypt - transparent file encryption in git

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1562519

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2018-04-11 19:02:04



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
git-crypt-0.6.0-3.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 stable repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

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

[Bug 1557371] Review Request: java-openjdk - rolling release for short term support OpenJDK

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1557371



--- Comment #49 from Fedora Update System  ---
java-openjdk-10.0.0.46-10.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-d8b998b655

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1563680] Package Review: libocxl - library for OpenCAPI accelerator

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1563680

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System  ---
libocxl-1.0.0-0.1.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 testing repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-80a761dd88

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1565671] Review Request: gnome-control-center - Utilities to configure the GNOME desktop

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565671

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
gnome-control-center-3.28.1-1.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-a0a1cd4af2

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1565571] Review Request: python-backcall - Specifications for callback functions passed in to an API

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565571

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
ipython-6.3.1-1.fc28, python-backcall-0.1.0-1.fc28 has been pushed to the
Fedora 28 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it
in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-785c5e4c66

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1557371] Review Request: java-openjdk - rolling release for short term support OpenJDK

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1557371

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #48 from Fedora Update System  ---
java-openjdk-10.0.0.46-10.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-9ea9bf0f30

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1561757] Review Request: golang-github-dsnet-compress - Collection of compression related Go packages

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1561757
Bug 1561757 depends on bug 1564272, which changed state.

Bug 1564272 Summary: Review Request: golang-github-klauspost-compress - 
Optimized compression packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1564272

   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 1564272] Review Request: golang-github-klauspost-compress - Optimized compression packages

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1564272

Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2018-04-11 18:18:21



--- Comment #3 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski  ---
I had to make it archful due to the use of assembly on x86_64 (noarch package
came out different on x86_64), but finally imported and built for rawhide.
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 1377262] Review Request: golang-github-go-macaron-gzip - Provides Gzip compress to responses for Macaron

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1377262
Bug 1377262 depends on bug 1564272, which changed state.

Bug 1564272 Summary: Review Request: golang-github-klauspost-compress - 
Optimized compression packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1564272

   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 1565848] Review Request: Bear - Tool that generates a compilation database for clang tooling

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565848



--- Comment #5 from dan.cer...@cgc-instruments.com ---
I have fixed the problem on EL, the new spec file now builds successfully on
Copr (https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/defolos/devel/build/740012/).

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1566159] Review Request: borgmatic - a simple Python wrapper script for the Borg backup software

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1566159



--- Comment #3 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
 - Run the SystemD scriplets
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Scriptlets?rd=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

[Bug 1566159] Review Request: borgmatic - a simple Python wrapper script for the Borg backup software

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1566159



--- Comment #2 from Benjamin Pereto  ---
Updated SPEC and SRPM.

borgmatic.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) borgbackup -> backup
borgmatic.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US atticmatic ->
astigmatic, automatic, asthmatic
borgmatic.src:36: W: setup-not-quiet
borgmatic.src: W: invalid-url Source1:
https://projects.torsion.org/witten/borgmatic/raw/branch/master/LICENSE HTTP
Error 401: Unauthorized
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 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 1519785] Review Request: notepadqq - An advanced text editor for developers

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1519785



--- Comment #8 from j...@kcore.org ---
I'm sorry - I seem to have pasted the wrong koji url.

This one is correct for the latest build:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=26312199

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1519785] Review Request: notepadqq - An advanced text editor for developers

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1519785



--- Comment #7 from j...@kcore.org ---
Added the Provides: in build
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=26311309

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1562632] Review Request: perl-Config-Std - Perl module to load and save configuration files in a standard format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1562632



--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-Config-Std-0.903-2.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 stable
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.

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

[Bug 1562631] Review Request: perl-HTML-Restrict - Perl module to strip unwanted HTML tags and attributes

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1562631



--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-HTML-Restrict-2.3.0-1.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 stable
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.

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

[Bug 1562245] Review Request: python-neo4j-driver - The official Python Neo4j driver

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1562245



--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-neo4j-driver-1.5.3-2.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 stable
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.

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

[Bug 1519785] Review Request: notepadqq - An advanced text editor for developers

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1519785



--- Comment #6 from j...@kcore.org ---
I've submitted a new build to koji:

https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=26311309

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1566159] Review Request: borgmatic - a simple Python wrapper script for the Borg backup software

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1566159

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

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



--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
 - Could you also provide for your users the SystemD unit files from upstream:
https://projects.torsion.org/witten/borgmatic/src/branch/master/sample/systemd
(might need to edit them to point to /usr/bin/borgmatic instead of
/usr/local/bin/borgmatic)

 - Download and install the license file:
https://projects.torsion.org/witten/borgmatic/raw/branch/master/LICENSE

 - Simplify the summary

borgmatic.x86_64: W: summary-not-capitalized C borgmatic is a simple Python
wrapper script for borgbackup
borgmatic.x86_64: W: name-repeated-in-summary C borgmatic

Summary:Simple Python wrapper script for borgbackup



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.
[!]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
 license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
 license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "Unknown or generated". 39 files have unknown license. Detailed
 output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/borgmatic/review-
 borgmatic/licensecheck.txt
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 2 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
 provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
 %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

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

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not 

[Bug 1562632] Review Request: perl-Config-Std - Perl module to load and save configuration files in a standard format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1562632



--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-Config-Std-0.903-2.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 stable
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.

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

[Bug 1559388] Review Request: dep - Go dependency management tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1559388

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2018-04-11 12:31:10



--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System  ---
dep-0.4.1-1.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 stable repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

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

[Bug 1562631] Review Request: perl-HTML-Restrict - Perl module to strip unwanted HTML tags and attributes

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1562631



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-HTML-Restrict-2.3.0-1.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 stable
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.

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

[Bug 1566159] New: Review Request: borgmatic - a simple Python wrapper script for the Borg backup software

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1566159

Bug ID: 1566159
   Summary: Review Request: borgmatic - a simple Python wrapper
script for the Borg backup software
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: benja...@sandchaschte.ch
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: https://pagure.io/borgmatic/blob/master/f/borgmatic.spec
SRPM URL:
https://pagure.io/borgmatic/blob/master/f/borgmatic-1.1.15-1.fc27.src.rpm

Description: borgmatic (formerly atticmatic) is a simple Python wrapper script
for the Borg backup software that initiates a backup, prunes any old backups
according to a retention policy, and validates backups for consistency.

Fedora Account System Username: bpereto

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1566064] Review Request: python-pymdown-extensions - Extension pack for Python Markdown

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1566064



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

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1563184] Review Request: rpkg-util - RPM packaging utility

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1563184



--- Comment #9 from cl...@redhat.com ---
(In reply to clime from comment #8)
> (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #7)
> > Still has a VCS tag, and the Source0 isn't a URL that can be fetched to get
> > the tarball.
> 
> I haven't found any mention in guidelines of VCS tag being forbidden. I
> believe it's ok to use it as a tag describing upstream source for the
> package.
> 
> Using non-url Source0 should be also alright as described here:
> 
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Using_Revision_Control
> 
> Comments how to obtain the Source0 were added.

Also...as you can see...

https://releases.pagure.org/rpkg-util

upstream does not provide source tarball *shrugs*.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1566064] Review Request: python-pymdown-extensions - Extension pack for Python Markdown

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1566064

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

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



--- Comment #3 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
Package 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 1566064] Review Request: python-pymdown-extensions - Extension pack for Python Markdown

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1566064



--- Comment #2 from Stephen Gallagher  ---
Thanks for the review!

Spec URL:
https://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/packagereview/python-pymdown-extensions/python-pymdown-extensions.spec

SRPM URL:
https://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/packagereview/python-pymdown-extensions/python-pymdown-extensions-3.5-4.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 1564720] Review Request: watchman - a file watching service

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1564720

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

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



--- Comment #5 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
Package 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 1566064] Review Request: python-pymdown-extensions - Extension pack for Python Markdown

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1566064

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||zebo...@gmail.com



--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
 - Parts of the code is BSD:

BSD (unspecified)
-
pymdown-extensions-3.5/pymdownx/extrarawhtml.py
pymdown-extensions-3.5/pymdownx/highlight.py
pymdown-extensions-3.5/pymdownx/superfences.py

   - Add it to the License: field and add a comment explaining the license
breakdown.


 - "MIT License" is not a valid license shorthand, it should just be "MIT"

License:MIT and BSD



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)", "BSD (unspecified)", "Unknown or
 generated", "MIT/X11 (BSD like) BSD (unspecified)". 217 files have
 unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
 /home/bob/packaging/review/python-pymdown-extensions/review-python-
 pymdown-extensions/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: 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 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

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

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[-]: 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).
[?]: 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 

[Bug 1566061] Review Request: python-django-oauth-toolkit - OAuth2 goodies for Django

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1566061



--- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-django-oauth-toolkit

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1566061] Review Request: python-django-oauth-toolkit - OAuth2 goodies for Django

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1566061

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
 CC||zebo...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
Summary|Review Request: |Review Request:
   |python-dango-oauth-toolkit  |python-django-oauth-toolkit
   |- OAuth2 goodies for Django |- OAuth2 goodies for Django
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
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 (2 clause)", "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* BSD
 (unspecified)". 65 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
 licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/python-django-oauth-toolkit
 /review-python-django-oauth-toolkit/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 20480 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]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
 provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
 %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

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

= 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).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
 justified.
[-]: Description and summary sections in 

[Bug 1566056] Review Request: python-django-braces - Reusable, generic mixins for Django

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1566056



--- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-django-braces

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1565848] Review Request: Bear - Tool that generates a compilation database for clang tooling

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565848



--- Comment #4 from dan.cer...@cgc-instruments.com ---
And now the CentOS build failed. I'll report back when I have fixed it.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1566056] Review Request: python-django-braces - Reusable, generic mixins for Django

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1566056

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  ---
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)", "BSD (unspecified)", "Unknown or generated",
 "*No copyright* BSD (unspecified)". 35 files have unknown license.
 Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/python-
 django-braces/review-python-django-braces/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: 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 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

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

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[-]: 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).
[Q]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
 translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
 architectures.
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve 

[Bug 1565848] Review Request: Bear - Tool that generates a compilation database for clang tooling

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565848



--- Comment #3 from dan.cer...@cgc-instruments.com ---
My apologies, I have forgotten one unversioned python in the spec file. The
Copr build without that is:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/defolos/devel/build/739830/

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1565848] Review Request: Bear - Tool that generates a compilation database for clang tooling

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565848



--- Comment #2 from dan.cer...@cgc-instruments.com ---
Thank you for the swift review!

I have addressed your comments and fixed the issues. I have also uploaded the
spec & patch file to pagure: https://pagure.io/Bear_rpm and pushed the new
source rpm to Copr:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/defolos/devel/build/739812/

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1566064] New: Review Request: python-pymdown-extensions - Extension pack for Python Markdown

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1566064

Bug ID: 1566064
   Summary: Review Request: python-pymdown-extensions - Extension
pack for Python Markdown
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: sgall...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL:
https://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/packagereview/python-pymdown-extensions/python-pymdown-extensions.spec
SRPM URL:
https://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/packagereview/python-pymdown-extensions/python-pymdown-extensions-3.5-3.fc28.src.rpm
Description:
PyMdown Extensions (pymdownx) is a collection of extensions for Python
Markdown. It should work for Python Markdown versions 2.6.0 and greater.

Fedora Account System Username: sgallagh

Notes:
This package is one of several being added exclusively to support ReviewBoard,
a python2-only Django 1.6-based application that will be packaged as a module.
As such, it is intentionally limited to only providing its python 2 version in
this package.

Also note that fedora-review may not work against this package, as building it
may require other packages from the ReviewBoard module. You can see and
download the builds at
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/sgallagh/reviewboard3/ if needed.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1566061] New: Review Request: python-dango-oauth-toolkit - OAuth2 goodies for Django

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1566061

Bug ID: 1566061
   Summary: Review Request: python-dango-oauth-toolkit - OAuth2
goodies for Django
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: sgall...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL:
https://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/packagereview/python-django-oauth-toolkit/python-django-oauth-toolkit.spec
SRPM URL:
https://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/packagereview/python-django-oauth-toolkit/python-django-oauth-toolkit-0.9.0-3.fc28.src.rpm
Description:
Django OAuth Toolkit *OAuth2 goodies for the Djangonauts!* If you are facing
one or more of the following: * Your Django app exposes a web API you want to
protect with OAuth2 authentication, * You need to implement an OAuth2
authorization server to provide tokens management for your
infrastructure,Django OAuth Toolkit can help you providing out of the box all
the endpoints, data and logic...

Fedora Account System Username: sgallagh

Notes:
This package is one of several being added exclusively to support ReviewBoard,
a python2-only Django 1.6-based application that will be packaged as a module.
As such, it is intentionally limited to only providing its python 2 version in
this package.

Also note that fedora-review may not work against this package, as building it
may require other packages from the ReviewBoard module. You can see and
download the builds at
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/sgallagh/reviewboard3/ if needed.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1566056] New: Review Request: python-django-braces - Reusable, generic mixins for Django

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1566056

Bug ID: 1566056
   Summary: Review Request: python-django-braces - Reusable,
generic mixins for Django
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: sgall...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL:
https://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/packagereview/python-django-braces/python-django-braces.spec
SRPM URL:
https://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/packagereview/python-django-braces/python-django-braces-1.12.0-2.fc28.src.rpm
Description: Mixins to add easy functionality to Django classbased views,
forms, and models.
Fedora Account System Username: sgallagh

Notes:
This package is one of several being added exclusively to support ReviewBoard,
a python2-only Django 1.6-based application that will be packaged as a module.
As such, it is intentionally limited to only providing its python 2 version in
this package.

Also note that fedora-review may not work against this package, as building it
may require other packages from the ReviewBoard module. You can see and
download the builds at
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/sgallagh/reviewboard3/ if needed.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1564835] Review Request: gmediarender - Resource efficient UPnP/ DLNA renderer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1564835



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

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1563184] Review Request: rpkg-util - RPM packaging utility

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1563184



--- Comment #8 from cl...@redhat.com ---
(In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #7)
> Still has a VCS tag, and the Source0 isn't a URL that can be fetched to get
> the tarball.

I haven't found any mention in guidelines of VCS tag being forbidden. I believe
it's ok to use it as a tag describing upstream source for the package.

Using non-url Source0 should be also alright as described here:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Using_Revision_Control

Comments how to obtain the Source0 were added.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1563184] Review Request: rpkg-util - RPM packaging utility

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1563184



--- Comment #7 from Neal Gompa  ---
Still has a VCS tag, and the Source0 isn't a URL that can be fetched to get the
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 1565848] Review Request: Bear - Tool that generates a compilation database for clang tooling

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1565848

Iwicki Artur  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||fed...@svgames.pl



--- Comment #1 from Iwicki Artur  ---
>URL:https://github.com/rizsotto/%{name}
>Source: https://github.com/rizsotto/%{name}/archive/%{version}.tar.gz
Don't repeat yourself; use %{URL} as part of Source.

>BuildRequires: cmake make python gcc
>Requires: python
With Python2 being slowly phased out, I believe you should use an explicit
"python2" or "python3" requires.

>$ head -n1 /usr/bin/bear
>#!/usr/bin/env python
"/usr/bin/env" MUST NOT be used. Edit this line with awk, or through a Patch,
and make it use "/usr/bin/python{2,3}".
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Shebang_lines

>%doc %{_mandir}/man1/bear.1*
Man pages should not be marked as %doc.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1557371] Review Request: java-openjdk - rolling release for short term support OpenJDK

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1557371

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 1557371] Review Request: java-openjdk - rolling release for short term support OpenJDK

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1557371



--- Comment #47 from Fedora Update System  ---
java-openjdk-10.0.0.46-10.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-9ea9bf0f30

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1557371] Review Request: java-openjdk - rolling release for short term support OpenJDK

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1557371



--- Comment #46 from Fedora Update System  ---
java-openjdk-10.0.0.46-10.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-d8b998b655

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1563184] Review Request: rpkg-util - RPM packaging utility

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1563184



--- Comment #6 from cl...@redhat.com ---
ping.

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

[Bug 1563680] Package Review: libocxl - library for OpenCAPI accelerator

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1563680

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



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

[Bug 1563680] Package Review: libocxl - library for OpenCAPI accelerator

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1563680



--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System  ---
libocxl-1.0.0-0.1.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-80a761dd88

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 796298] Review Request: perl-Tk-EntryCheck - Interface to Tk:: Entry for controlling its length and content

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=796298

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed|2012-02-27 08:55:19 |2018-04-11 02:55:34



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