[Bug 1613909] Review Request: containernetworking-plugins - Libraries for writing CNI plugins
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1613909 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- containernetworking-plugins-0.7.3-1.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-a457d9490c -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/CQKZ6NOM4Q5UI2XVCYXYK5GV6JBSRSFM/
[Bug 1617920] Review Request: kcov - Code coverage tool without special compilation options
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1617920 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- kcov-35-1.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-b19a317636 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/34R7TR7AC55AA4FG7NOUGK3GEAUHHTUK/
[Bug 1619095] Review Request: R-ps - List, Query, Manipulate System Processes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619095 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- R-ps-1.1.0-2.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-2018-279fa8e9bb -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/DIHL3ZNVDESHOQ6ADPWDVYVHPHDDBJ3H/
[Bug 1619855] Review Request: python-pikepdf - Read and write PDFs with Python, powered by qpdf
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619855 --- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=29219735 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/UKQJHXGKZMJ5IOKM7FO5MV4UW33HOJSA/
[Bug 1619855] New: Review Request: python-pikepdf - Read and write PDFs with Python, powered by qpdf
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619855 Bug ID: 1619855 Summary: Review Request: python-pikepdf - Read and write PDFs with Python, powered by qpdf 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//python-pikepdf.spec SRPM URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//python-pikepdf-0.3.2-1.fc28.src.rpm Description: pikepdf is a Python library allowing creation, manipulation and repair of PDFs. It provides a Pythonic wrapper around the C++ PDF content transformation library, QPDF. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/O4FEPDOZJPH25Y3QDQEJ5H6SWQOEOUUA/
[Bug 1619528] Review Request: textern - Firefox add-on for editing text in your favorite external editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619528 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |POST Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #11 from Robert-André Mauchin --- Sounds good, 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/OM2AZXDA3WBBFPSOEI2DAK62J45DL46K/
[Bug 1615381] Review Request: minizip - Minizip contrib in zlib with the latest bug fixes and advanced features
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1615381
Michel Alexandre Salim changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||needinfo?(panovotn@redhat.c
||om)
--- Comment #3 from Michel Alexandre Salim ---
A few issues highlighted before that should be easy to fix and then I can
approve this.
Also one suggestion (feel free to use or not as you like): you can use
%autosetup that will also apply the patch for you automatically (you'll still
need to do the `rm -rf lib/bzip2` cleanup)
see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#.25autosetup
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
%prep should have `rm -rf lib/bzip2` without %{buildroot}
- Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib64/cmake
devel subpackage should require cmake
- Requires correct, justified where necessary.
no need to manually require zlib:
$ rpm -qp --requires minizip-2.5.0-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm | grep -e zlib -e libz
libz.so.1()(64bit)
zlib
- ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
Note: /sbin/ldconfig not called in minizip
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Shared_Libraries
= 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.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "BSD (3 clause)", "Unknown or generated". 124 files have
unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/michel/src/fedora/reviews/1615381-minizip/licensecheck.txt
false positive due to lib/bzip2 not being erased correctly
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib64/cmake
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[!]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
%prep does not delete this correctly
[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
[-]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[!]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: 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 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
[Bug 1290995] Review Request: python-visionegg-quest - QUEST algorithm for finding threshold
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1290995 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(i.gnatenko.brain@ ||gmail.com) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/K4ALFAUQ3W5N6ULSGTF5HCVFUBSR5SNU/
[Bug 1279579] Review Request: itktools - Practical command line tools based on the ITK
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1279579 --- Comment #9 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) --- 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/YEI74EN4AG2GX764HPJKXQCPNA7KELWR/
[Bug 1279176] Review Request: isis - Framework to access a large variety of image processing libraries
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1279176 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(i.gnatenko.brain@ ||gmail.com) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/YNZAY2MXIEHQJTXYUC3RTHNHAPMJYUN4/
[Bug 1288836] Review Request: python-petlink - Decode and encode PETlink streams
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1288836 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sanjay.an...@gmail.com Flags||needinfo?(i.gnatenko.brain@ ||gmail.com) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/VTJGRJFIWP7RW5JG3KVTU4RZY6AAZODG/
[Bug 1291021] Review Request: debruijn - Software for the generation de Bruijn sequences for neuroscience experiments
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1291021 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sanjay.an...@gmail.com Flags||needinfo?(i.gnatenko.brain@ ||gmail.com) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/D223KE7V332WEWDWC2Y7SNGDOR2KNWKN/
[Bug 1288870] Review Request: python-pymc3 - Bayesian statistical modeling and model fitting
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1288870 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sanjay.an...@gmail.com Flags||needinfo?(i.gnatenko.brain@ ||gmail.com) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/NLBAMK66EDS7UHHMDP2RAU6C7CJQNT43/
[Bug 1288759] Review Request: python-commit - Convex Optimization Modeling for Microstructure Informed Tractography
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1288759 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sanjay.an...@gmail.com Flags||needinfo?(i.gnatenko.brain@ ||gmail.com) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/2W45XKTD4QPRQX22FUKEVZHMFDTZV7FY/
[Bug 1280485] Review Request: python-PyMVPA - Multivariate pattern analysis
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1280485 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sanjay.an...@gmail.com Flags||needinfo?(i.gnatenko.brain@ ||gmail.com) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/BJ2QBNT3NI4IRD22VPIIRRZZG3BHOIHN/
[Bug 1291061] Review Request: python-pyspike - Python library for the numerical analysis of spiketrain similarity
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1291061 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sanjay.an...@gmail.com Flags||needinfo?(i.gnatenko.brain@ ||gmail.com) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/W4RYQ7X5H3GQ25Y62OTTURQMUHAMSVFZ/
[Bug 1288750] Review Request: nuitka - Python compiler with full language support and CPython compatibility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1288750 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) changed: What|Removed |Added CC||i.gnatenko.br...@gmail.com, ||sanjay.an...@gmail.com Flags||needinfo?(i.gnatenko.brain@ ||gmail.com) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/NQJKNXCJT4JLMLJU3ARB6S4B34TEPWEQ/
[Bug 1291877] Review Request: python-nilearn - Python module for fast and easy statistical learning on NeuroImaging data
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1291877 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(i.gnatenko.brain@ ||gmail.com) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/E266CA5F6AYSOJC4K45ZXEVF5VGPQY5Z/
[Bug 1280480] Review Request: python-duecredit - Automated collection and reporting of citations for used software /methods/datasets
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1280480 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(ignatenko@redhat. |needinfo?(i.gnatenko.brain@ |com)|gmail.com) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/6GK3DB6LN4AAKF3WPZ3BORCV7XH3N3JD/
[Bug 1619610] mozilla-filesystem to own %_libdir/mozilla/ native-messaging-hosts
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619610 --- Comment #2 from Pavel Raiskup --- Plus, it would be super nice if we could have non-arch-specific alternative path, e.g. under /usr/share. E.g. this forces us to make 'textern' package arch specific (can not be noarch). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/6TFIHBTT65KRW54QZOG5I4QG7ULFVSLR/
[Bug 1619528] Review Request: textern - Firefox add-on for editing text in your favorite external editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619528 --- Comment #10 from Pavel Raiskup --- Thanks a lot! Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/praiskup/textern-rpm/master/textern.spec SRPM URL: https://praiskup.fedorapeople.org/textern-0-0.3.20180821git5339fb6.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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/GJK4IKPRUFLRUF4L7CLZQQPYNCMKIHXV/
[Bug 1619833] New: Review Request: python-xmp-toolkit - Python XMP Toolkit for working with metadata
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619833 Bug ID: 1619833 Summary: Review Request: python-xmp-toolkit - Python XMP Toolkit for working with metadata 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//python-xmp-toolkit.spec SRPM URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//python-xmp-toolkit-2.0.1-1.fc28.src.rpm Description: Python XMP Toolkit Python XMP Toolkit is a library for working with XMP metadata, as well as reading/writing XMP metadata stored in many different file formats. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/325BRFA3GQAN2TW5CYIXKC6NWTQLGCBJ/
[Bug 1619833] Review Request: python-xmp-toolkit - Python XMP Toolkit for working with metadata
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619833 --- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=29218822 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/2DDGUHNV3SSZKHYH2ENJENBZIZ2JRLQ3/
[Bug 1619551] Review Request: python-pytest-helpers-namespace - PyTest Helpers Namespace
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619551 --- Comment #3 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-pytest-helpers-namespace -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/FMDR75AEAT7WCTYCSIQCGY2K3V2ZDBG2/
[Bug 1608949] Review Request: tini - A tiny but valid init for containers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1608949
--- Comment #1 from Will Benton ---
Thanks, Ricardo! There are a few things to address here; my review follows.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
Issues:
===
- All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
Note: These BR are not needed: gcc
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2
- 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.
Note: License file LICENSE is not marked as %license
See:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text
- Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
Note: Rpm(s) have files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local: /usr/local
tini-0.18.0-1.fc26.x86_64.rpm
See:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#PackageDocumentation
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[!]: Package contains no static executables.
- don't ship tini-static
[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.
[!]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
- use %{optflags} or $RPM_OPT_FLAGS in the CFLAGS setting
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[!]: Changelog in prescribed format.
- changelog entries must include version numbers; see
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Changelogs
[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
[-]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[!]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
- use %{_bindir} instead of /usr/bin
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[!]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
- don't install into /usr/local/bin
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[-]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
- gcc require is unnecessary
- glibc-static require is unnecessary since we shouldn't ship static tini
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
[!]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
- use %cmake macro (see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Cmake)
- don't install into /usr/local
- use %license macro for the license file instead of %doc (see here:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Use_license_macro_in_RPMs_for_packages_in_Cloud_Image#Documentation)
- include Summary field (current contents of %description are fine)
- expand description with material from upstream
[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.
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the
[Bug 1513293] Review Request: rejson - JSON data type for Redis
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1513293 Richard Fontana changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tcall...@redhat.com Flags||needinfo?(tcallawa@redhat.c ||om) --- Comment #7 from Richard Fontana --- Not sure if FE-Legal is appropriate in this case since this is closed but alerting Tom Callaway who will know what to do. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/QMXBS7RR2ADWQBK5T3CEGMCV7MK5NICG/
[Bug 1619528] Review Request: textern - Firefox add-on for editing text in your favorite external editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619528 --- Comment #9 from Lukáš Tyrychtr --- (In reply to Robert-André Mauchin from comment #7) > (In reply to Lukáš Tyrychtr from comment #3) > > Note that i do not actually understand the mock install failure, i can > > install the package just fine. > > > In hat case check in results/root.log and search for "Error:". You'll get > the reason why it failed. The error was that for some reason python3-inotify_simple was not found in the repository, but it was some sort of temporary failure, it installs just fine now. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/H3KKLCHATDWKLTYCTCW4HEHCKNFE6YK7/
[Bug 1619460] Review Request: python-pytest-expect - py.test plugin to store test expectations and mark tests based on them
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619460 Miro Hrončok changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Fixed In Version||python-pytest-expect-1.1.0- ||1.fc29 Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2018-08-21 11:16:36 --- Comment #3 from Miro Hrončok --- 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/ABCEIB6SC6YB57RASOZECSYSEXKEUJ57/
[Bug 1619459] Review Request: python-u-msgpack-python - A portable, lightweight MessagePack serializer and deserializer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619459 Miro Hrončok changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Fixed In Version||python-u-msgpack-python-2.5 ||.0-1.fc29 Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2018-08-21 11:16:09 --- Comment #8 from Miro Hrončok --- Thank You both. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/7NGIYXPF6ZGZFDLYQCEBQJ7YTRUYWBB5/
[Bug 1619460] Review Request: python-pytest-expect - py.test plugin to store test expectations and mark tests based on them
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619460 Bug 1619460 depends on bug 1619459, which changed state. Bug 1619459 Summary: Review Request: python-u-msgpack-python - A portable, lightweight MessagePack serializer and deserializer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619459 What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/K77EM6FPWOG436ZJ7BWZYA5MWSKODJ2A/
[Bug 1513293] Review Request: rejson - JSON data type for Redis
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1513293 --- Comment #6 from Richard Fontana --- Blocking on Fedora Legal. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/SJURZ7B6AHYUQA7LXMKCJKBXMSIPXH7L/
[Bug 1513293] Review Request: rejson - JSON data type for Redis
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1513293 Richard Fontana changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rfont...@redhat.com Blocks||182235 (FE-Legal) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=182235 [Bug 182235] Fedora Legal 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/2HMPTAQYUQ7NKRWGXR4UK4KX7UQU2IPP/
[Bug 1619460] Review Request: python-pytest-expect - py.test plugin to store test expectations and mark tests based on them
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619460 --- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-pytest-expect -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/BQW2NPKHEAM77DY6OJV36PHYYSMOL4RJ/
[Bug 1619459] Review Request: python-u-msgpack-python - A portable, lightweight MessagePack serializer and deserializer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619459 --- Comment #7 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-u-msgpack-python -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/2DJGGWZWCVDHYWMWPCNI5GTXNWFC6QBN/
[Bug 1619528] Review Request: textern - Firefox add-on for editing text in your favorite external editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619528
--- Comment #8 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
- As Lukáš noted, add a comment explaining why the patch is needed.
[!]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
justified.
- I don't get this:
# curl https://api.github.com/repos/jlebon/textern/tarball/5339fb6 > tarball
Source0:jlebon-textern-%gitrev.tar.gz
Grab the tar.gz directly:
Source0:%url/archive/%{gitrev}/%{name}-%{gitrev}.tar.gz
- Version/Release is not good. See the rules on versioning a snapshot:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Versioning#Snapshots
%global commit 5339fb6ae33c72c27f2769d0fc3dabb6191b5d3a
%global shortcommit %(c=%{commit}; echo ${c:0:7})
%global snapshotdate 20180821
%global debug_package %nil
# this enforces us to create non-noarch package
%global native_dir %_libdir/mozilla/native-messaging-hosts
%global __brp_python_bytecompile :
Name: textern
Version:0
Release:0.3.%{snapshotdate}git%{shortcommit}%{?dist}
Summary:Firefox add-on for editing text in your favorite external
editor
License:GPLv3
URL:https://github.com/jlebon/textern
Source0:%url/archive/%{shortcommit}/%{name}-%{shortcommit}.tar.gz
And
%prep
%autosetup -p1 -n textern-%commit
Note the 0.3 instead of 3 for a pre-release.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/X22HRM5MYNXSJNSVW7WR3LJC7KTGL7OY/
[Bug 1539161] Review Request: moby-engine - The open-source application container engine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1539161 --- Comment #29 from Scott McCarty --- Will the versioning track the Docker CE version closely so that people understand what this is? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/VELKGP7EVHSAJ2XL3SF5I7YUJEFJLH55/
[Bug 1539161] Review Request: moby-engine - The open-source application container engine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1539161 Scott McCarty changed: What|Removed |Added CC||smcca...@redhat.com --- Comment #28 from Scott McCarty --- Will people be able to type "yum install docker" "systemctl enable docker" and "docker run -it fedora bash" with this 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/EN5DHIOLWPLNXFRVZ3EV5QE4XUHQHB5G/
[Bug 1619551] Review Request: python-pytest-helpers-namespace - PyTest Helpers Namespace
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619551
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 #2 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]: 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", "*No copyright* Apache (v2.0)". 10
files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/bob/packaging/review/python-pytest-helpers-namespace/review-
python-pytest-helpers-namespace/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: No rpmlint messages.
[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
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]: Packages MUST NOT have dependencies (either build-time or runtime) on
packages named with the unversioned python- prefix unless no properly
versioned package exists. Dependencies on Python packages instead MUST
use names beginning with python2- or python3- as appropriate.
[x]: Python packages must not contain %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files
[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
[Bug 1619528] Review Request: textern - Firefox add-on for editing text in your favorite external editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619528 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||zebo...@gmail.com --- Comment #7 from Robert-André Mauchin --- (In reply to Lukáš Tyrychtr from comment #3) > Note that i do not actually understand the mock install failure, i can > install the package just fine. > In hat case check in results/root.log and search for "Error:". You'll get the reason why it failed. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/2ZVDSU3DODKPWIKZVXL3QO3BW6IFVWYF/
[Bug 1619460] Review Request: python-pytest-expect - py.test plugin to store test expectations and mark tests based on them
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619460
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: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "Unknown or generated". 11 files have
unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/bob/packaging/review/python-pytest-expect/review-python-pytest-
expect/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]: 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]: 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]: Packages MUST NOT have dependencies (either build-time or runtime) on
packages named with the unversioned python- prefix unless no properly
versioned package exists. Dependencies on Python packages instead MUST
use names beginning with python2- or python3- as appropriate.
[x]: Python packages must not contain %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files
[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 for supported Non-English
[Bug 1619459] Review Request: python-u-msgpack-python - A portable, lightweight MessagePack serializer and deserializer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619459 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 #6 from Robert-André Mauchin --- Looks good to me, package approved. Good luck for the sponsorship. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/A5WLOQUMEOUXG5Y4IC7O63FYJK2MJSWU/
[Bug 1619610] mozilla-filesystem to own %_libdir/mozilla/ native-messaging-hosts
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619610 --- Comment #1 from Lukáš Tyrychtr --- In my opinion it is a good idea, however this probably will a comment from someone more experienced in the current packaging state. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/OGVV66USLCXDEXXGCN64EDENGEHX2IS4/
[Bug 1619528] Review Request: textern - Firefox add-on for editing text in your favorite external editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619528 --- Comment #6 from Lukáš Tyrychtr --- Strange, also run on F28, tried the default mock config and also rawhide. However as this was one of my first reviews and one of the reasons for it is that i need to get sponsored to the packager group myself you probably should wait if someone else can verify my results. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/5VKVFXZRGTWF76A3Y5A6PLYY6XCXL5CD/
[Bug 1619459] Review Request: python-u-msgpack-python - A portable, lightweight MessagePack serializer and deserializer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619459 --- Comment #5 from Lukáš Tyrychtr --- Yes, that's the main case for this review, yes. I would like to finish my proposal about the Festival speech synthesis upgrade, so other things must be accomplished first. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/MXI6XIUYAT3HMLFTYQBONVZZIUUS6OE4/
[Bug 1619458] Review Request: python-pyphi - A library for computing integrated information
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619458
Robert-André Mauchin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zebo...@gmail.com
--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
- %{python3_sitelib}/*
This is now forbidden: see https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/782 You
need to be more specific instead of using a glob.
- License is wrong, it is GPLv3
https://github.com/wmayner/pyphi/blob/develop/LICENSE.md
- Remove all the Python shebangs. See rpmlint output below
- Package the missing deps needed for install
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- Package installs properly.
Note: Installation errors (see attachment)
See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines
- Python packages must not contain %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files
Note: Package contains %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files
See: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/782
= 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.
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "BSD (unspecified)", "LGPL (v3 or later)", "Unknown or
generated". 222 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/python-pyphi/review-python-
pyphi/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 40960 bytes in 4 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]: 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]: 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]: Packages MUST NOT have dependencies (either build-time or runtime) on
packages named with the unversioned python- prefix unless no properly
versioned package exists. Dependencies on Python packages instead MUST
use names beginning with python2- or python3- as appropriate.
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license
[Bug 1619528] Review Request: textern - Firefox add-on for editing text in your favorite external editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619528 --- Comment #5 from Pavel Raiskup --- Run on fedora 28: $ fedora-review -b 1619528 ... [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 pr ... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/ICYEDGEY3NY5MWO2MNG7E7ZFEH3I3ODN/
[Bug 1619528] Review Request: textern - Firefox add-on for editing text in your favorite external editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619528 --- Comment #4 from Pavel Raiskup --- Since not all projects depend on /bin/make, I'd rather keep that BuildRequirement on place (one day we could have no /bin/make in default buildroot, same as we have no python/gcc/perl/etc). The install failure is weird. What system did you run fedora-review on, and what chroot did you use? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/LG5I7SWWXS34YSSZR4K5YQ3T6WEX5XJ2/
[Bug 1619459] Review Request: python-u-msgpack-python - A portable, lightweight MessagePack serializer and deserializer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619459 --- Comment #4 from Miro Hrončok --- Oh, so you are getting sponsored? Good luck! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/XEWSWZGKHPTRVIOPOQJXHNY6QNKKDPVT/
[Bug 1619528] Review Request: textern - Firefox add-on for editing text in your favorite external editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619528 Pavel Raiskup changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1619610 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619610 [Bug 1619610] mozilla-filesystem to own %_libdir/mozilla/native-messaging-hosts -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/YH5NTOCQFYHOQI5HDSUPGP7OQAPAMZB5/
[Bug 1619610] New: mozilla-filesystem to own %_libdir/mozilla/ native-messaging-hosts
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619610 Bug ID: 1619610 Summary: mozilla-filesystem to own %_libdir/mozilla/native-messaging-hosts Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: mozilla-filesystem Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: gecko-bugs-nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: prais...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: caillon+fedoraproj...@gmail.com, extras...@fedoraproject.org, gecko-bugs-nob...@fedoraproject.org, lukastyryc...@gmail.com, nob...@fedoraproject.org, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org, toms...@fedoraproject.org Depends On: 1619528 IMO, native-messaging-hosts should be owned by mozilla-filesystem. +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #1619528 +++ [?]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/lib64/mozilla/native- messaging-hosts(webextension-token-signing, chrome-gnome-shell) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619528 [Bug 1619528] Review Request: textern - Firefox add-on for editing text in your favorite external editor -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/EG5XWHPICC5RZAGS4DNUCED4DMGIONS6/
[Bug 1619459] Review Request: python-u-msgpack-python - A portable, lightweight MessagePack serializer and deserializer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619459 --- Comment #3 from Lukáš Tyrychtr --- From my point of view it should be okay, however as this is my first review, i'll not add the needed flags. I assume that Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek will look at this review in a few moments and if he agrees with my conclusions he will add the flags. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/LWYFX3X3APHP4R4D7YL4OM6NP6342ZFO/
[Bug 1619528] Review Request: textern - Firefox add-on for editing text in your favorite external editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619528
Lukáš Tyrychtr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lukastyryc...@gmail.com
--- Comment #3 from Lukáš Tyrychtr ---
Note that i do not actually understand the mock install failure, i can install
the package just fine.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- Package installs properly.
Note: Installation errors (see attachment)
See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines
- All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
Note: These BR are not needed: make
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* BSD (unspecified)". 12
files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/ltyrycht/1619528-textern/licensecheck.txt
[?]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/lib64/mozilla/native-
messaging-hosts(webextension-token-signing, chrome-gnome-shell)
[-]: %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.
[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]: 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]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[!]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
justified.
[x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented.
Note: Package contains tarball without URL, check comments
[-]: Description and summary sections in the
[Bug 1619459] Review Request: python-u-msgpack-python - A portable, lightweight MessagePack serializer and deserializer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619459 --- Comment #2 from Miro Hrončok --- Thank you. What's the conclusion? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/N3SED37XNELQDLELSSTZP3WS7MPMFJD6/
[Bug 1619459] Review Request: python-u-msgpack-python - A portable, lightweight MessagePack serializer and deserializer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619459
Lukáš Tyrychtr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lukastyryc...@gmail.com
--- Comment #1 from Lukáš Tyrychtr ---
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". 10 files have
unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/ltyrycht/1619459-python-u-msgpack-python/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.
[x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 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: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: 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).
[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.
[-]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot}
[Bug 1513293] Review Request: rejson - JSON data type for Redis
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1513293 Armijn Hemel changed: What|Removed |Added CC||arm...@tjaldur.nl --- Comment #5 from Armijn Hemel --- A month ago the license was changed to Apache 2 with "Commons Clause". This makes it incompatible with any open source license out there: https://github.com/RedisLabsModules/rejson/blob/master/LICENSE https://redislabs.com/community/commons-clause/ I would strongly recommend reconsidering the inclusion of this 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/IOX35Q65ZDLNMEWDUPTELSP6S3HVR4EH/
[Bug 1619551] Review Request: python-pytest-helpers-namespace - PyTest Helpers Namespace
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619551 --- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- koji scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=29211497 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/UPVFCJVEG4A27APCJBNFLNMHTLRWKMII/
[Bug 1619551] New: Review Request: python-pytest-helpers-namespace - PyTest Helpers Namespace
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619551 Bug ID: 1619551 Summary: Review Request: python-pytest-helpers-namespace - PyTest Helpers Namespace 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//python-pytest-helpers-namespace.spec SRPM URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//python-pytest-helpers-namespace-2017.11.11-1.fc28.src.rpm Description: Provides a helpers pytest namespace which can be used to register helper functions without requiring you to import them on your actual tests to use them. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/CFPBJD5KLPXZ4LLFE6WBPDKTTVXVL4YA/
[Bug 1619528] Review Request: textern - Firefox add-on for editing text in your favorite external editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619528 --- Comment #2 from Pavel Raiskup --- Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/praiskup/textern-rpm/master/textern.spec SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/praiskup/textern/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00789565-textern/textern-0.git5339fb6-3.fc30.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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/MOEIW5ASN6FRJEE55Q6YD4TO7NFKGMEQ/
[Bug 1619528] Review Request: textern - Firefox add-on for editing text in your favorite external editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619528 --- Comment #1 from Pavel Raiskup --- Test builds: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/praiskup/textern/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/RSB75VROVWA55R6LKPY3K7734LEOWRMC/
[Bug 1619528] New: Review Request: textern - Firefox add-on for editing text in your favorite external editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619528 Bug ID: 1619528 Summary: Review Request: textern - Firefox add-on for editing text in your favorite external editor Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: prais...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/praiskup/textern-rpm/master/textern.spec SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/praiskup/textern/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00789559-textern/textern-0.git5339fb6-1.fc30.src.rpm Description: Textern is a Firefox add-on that allows you to edit text areas in web pages using an external editor. It is similar in functionality to the popular It's All Text! add-on, though makes use of the WebExtension API and is thus fully compatible with multiprocessing and supported beyond Firefox 57. This is not a self-standing Firefox add-on, it's only the "native" application used by Add-on named "textern". Please install the Add-on manually. Fedora Account System Username: praiskup -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/6ZEGT2LKEPOOWG5FGXX72LGMZITLNIIA/
