[Bug 1342724] Review Request: libunibreak - A Unicode line-breaking library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1342724 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- libunibreak-4.0-2.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-42056955de -- 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
[Bug 1342724] Review Request: libunibreak - A Unicode line-breaking library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1342724 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|MODIFIED --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- libunibreak-4.0-2.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-1ea60703f8 -- 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
[Bug 1342724] Review Request: libunibreak - A Unicode line-breaking library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1342724 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- libunibreak-4.0-2.fc29 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 29. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-83e3cb9716 -- 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
[Bug 1615895] Review Request: greenboot - Generic Health Check Framework for systemd
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1615895 --- Comment #3 from Jared Smith --- Created attachment 1479381 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1479381=edit Differences from source and package This diff file shows the differences between the package and the upstream source. -- 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
[Bug 1615895] Review Request: greenboot - Generic Health Check Framework for systemd
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1615895
--- Comment #2 from Jared Smith ---
I apologize that this has taken me so long to finish.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- Sources used to build this package do not match the upstream source
- This package should own /etc/greenboot
- Sub-packages should depend on the fully-versioned main package
- Please capitalize the summary in the greenboot-ostree-grub2 sub-package
= 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* GNU Lesser General
Public License (v2.1 or later)". 18 files have unknown license.
Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/jsmith/Documents/Fedora/Reviews/1615895-greenboot/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
Note: No known owner of /etc/greenboot, /etc/motd.d,
/etc/greenboot/check
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners: /etc/greenboot/check,
/etc/motd.d, /etc/greenboot
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[?]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified.
Note: No (noreplace) in %config /etc/motd.d/greenboot
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[!]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package 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]: No %config files under /usr.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
greenboot-motd , greenboot-ostree-grub2 , greenboot-grub2 , greenboot-
reboot
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should
[Bug 1623302] Review Request: R-lokern - Kernel Regression Smoothing with Local or Global Plug-in Bandwidth
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623302 --- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- koji scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=29357640 -- 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
[Bug 1623302] New: Review Request: R-lokern - Kernel Regression Smoothing with Local or Global Plug-in Bandwidth
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623302 Bug ID: 1623302 Summary: Review Request: R-lokern - Kernel Regression Smoothing with Local or Global Plug-in Bandwidth 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//R-lokern.spec SRPM URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//R-lokern-1.1.8-1.fc28.src.rpm Description: Kernel regression smoothing with adaptive local or global plug-in bandwidth selection. -- 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
[Bug 1623300] Review Request: R-tweenr - Interpolate Data for Smooth Animations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623300 --- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- koji scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=29357688 -- 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
[Bug 1623300] New: Review Request: R-tweenr - Interpolate Data for Smooth Animations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623300 Bug ID: 1623300 Summary: Review Request: R-tweenr - Interpolate Data for Smooth Animations 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//R-tweenr.spec SRPM URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//R-tweenr-0.1.5-1.fc28.src.rpm Description: In order to create smooth animation between states of data, tweening is necessary. This package provides a range of functions for creating tweened data that plugs right into functions such as gg_animate() from the 'gganimate' package. Furthermore it adds a number of vectorized interpolaters for common R data types such as numeric, date and colour. -- 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
[Bug 1611828] Review Request: python-asyncssh - Asynchronous SSH for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1611828 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2018-08-28 20:55:29 --- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System --- python-asyncssh-1.13.3-1.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 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
[Bug 1618628] Review Request: python-mplcursors - Interactive data selection cursors for Matplotlib
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1618628 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2018-08-28 20:55:16 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- python-mplcursors-0.2-2.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 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
[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|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2018-08-28 20:55:23 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- containernetworking-plugins-0.7.3-1.fc28, podman-0.8.3-4.git9d09a4d.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 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
[Bug 1454481] Review Request: grimmer-proggy-squaresz-fonts - Proggy Square with slashed zero programming font
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1454481 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED CC||quantum.anal...@gmail.com Version|rawhide |27 Fixed In Version||grimmer-proggy-squaresz-fon ||ts-1.0-2.fc26 ||grimmer-proggy-squaresz-fon ||ts-1.0-2.fc27 ||grimmer-proggy-squaresz-fon ||ts-1.0-2.fc28 Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2018-08-28 20:49:08 --- Comment #7 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- Please re-open if necessary, but this appears to have been built. -- 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
[Bug 1583023] Review Request: shobhika-fonts - Free Indian truetype/ open type fonts
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1583023 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED CC||quantum.anal...@gmail.com Fixed In Version||shobhika-fonts-1.04-3.fc29 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2018-08-28 20:46:40 --- Comment #7 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- Please re-open if necessary, but this appears to have been built. -- 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
[Bug 1623188] Review Request: thttpd - tiny, turbo, throttleable lightweight HTTP server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623188 --- Comment #4 from Stuart D Gathman --- Regarding the rpmlint error, it sure looks like it calls chdir after chroot in the source. What does rpmlint look 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 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
[Bug 1623188] Review Request: thttpd - tiny, turbo, throttleable lightweight HTTP server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623188 --- Comment #3 from Stuart D Gathman --- Spec URL: https://gathman.org/linux/SPECS/thttpd.spec SRPM URL: https://gathman.org/linux/f27/src/thttpd-2.29-2.fc27.src.rpm I wonder if the with/without rebuild options are done correctly? In my SPECs I use %bcond_with and %bcond_without. -- 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
[Bug 1623295] Review Request: R-fontLiberation - Liberation Fonts
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623295 --- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- koji scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=29357025 -- 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
[Bug 1623295] New: Review Request: R-fontLiberation - Liberation Fonts
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623295 Bug ID: 1623295 Summary: Review Request: R-fontLiberation - Liberation Fonts 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//R-fontLiberation.spec SRPM URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//R-fontLiberation-0.1.0-1.fc28.src.rpm Description: A placeholder for the Liberation fontset intended for the `fontquiver` package. This fontset covers the 12 combinations of families (sans, serif, mono) and faces (plain, bold, italic, bold italic) supported in R graphics devices. -- 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
[Bug 1592220] Review Request: speech-tools - the current version of the support library for Festival
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1592220 --- Comment #21 from W. Michael Petullo --- I adjusted the festival package at #1457878 to make use of this separate speech-tools 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
[Bug 1623290] Review Request: R-fontBitstreamVera - Fonts with ' Bitstream Vera Fonts' License
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623290 --- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=29356834 -- 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
[Bug 1623290] New: Review Request: R-fontBitstreamVera - Fonts with ' Bitstream Vera Fonts' License
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623290 Bug ID: 1623290 Summary: Review Request: R-fontBitstreamVera - Fonts with 'Bitstream Vera Fonts' License 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//R-fontBitstreamVera.spec SRPM URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//R-fontBitstreamVera-0.1.1-1.fc28.src.rpm Description: Provides fonts licensed under the 'Bitstream Vera Fonts' license for the 'fontquiver' 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
[Bug 1622686] Review Request: nodejs-irc-formatting - Turns IRC formatted text into easy to use blocks
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622686 --- Comment #3 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/nodejs-irc-formatting -- 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
[Bug 1622685] Review Request: nodejs-zeropad - Zeropad your integers with optional n-length padding
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622685 --- Comment #3 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/nodejs-zeropad -- 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
[Bug 1622684] Review Request: nodejs-negative-zero - Check if a number if negative zero
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622684 --- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/nodejs-negative-zero -- 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
[Bug 1622689] Review Request: nodejs-chardet - Character detection tool for NodeJS
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622689 --- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/nodejs-chardet -- 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
[Bug 1622692] Review Request: nodejs-check-env - Makes sure that all required environment variables are set
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622692 --- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/nodejs-check-env -- 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
[Bug 1622625] Review Request: nodejs-discord-js - Powerful JavaScript library for interacting with the Discord API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622625 --- Comment #3 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/nodejs-discord-js -- 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
[Bug 1622624] Review Request: nodejs-prism-media - Easily transcode media using node.js
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622624 --- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/nodejs-prism-media -- 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
[Bug 1622623] Review Request: nodejs-snekfetch - Fast, efficient, and user-friendly http requests
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622623 --- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/nodejs-snekfetch -- 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
[Bug 1622622] Review Request: nodejs-long - Long class for representing a 64-bit two' s-complement integer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622622 --- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/nodejs-long -- 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
[Bug 1622619] Review Request: nodejs-tweetnacl - Port of TweetNaCl cryptographic library to JavaScript
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622619 --- Comment #3 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/nodejs-tweetnacl -- 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
[Bug 1622618] Review Request: nodejs-tweetnacl-util - Some string encoding utilities
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622618 --- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/nodejs-tweetnacl-util -- 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
[Bug 1623217] Review Request: libmpris-qt5 - Qt and QML MPRIS interface and adaptor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623217 --- Comment #7 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libmpris-qt5 -- 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
[Bug 1623138] Review Request: direwolf - Sound Card-based AX.25 TNC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623138 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- direwolf-1.5-0.1.beta4.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-dc5c62fa52 -- 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
[Bug 1623138] Review Request: direwolf - Sound Card-based AX.25 TNC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623138 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|MODIFIED --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- direwolf-1.5-0.1.beta4.fc29 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 29. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-9d329b28ee -- 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
[Bug 1623188] Review Request: thttpd - tiny, turbo, throttleable lightweight HTTP server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623188
Robert-André Mauchin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zebo...@gmail.com
--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
- Use:
%post
%systemd_post thttpd.service
%preun
%systemd_preun thttpd.service
%postun
%systemd_postun thttpd.service
- BR/R for systemd are not good, use instead:
%{?systemd_requires}
BuildRequires: systemd
- Not needed, it is the default:
%global _hardened_build 1
- This comment should probably not be in the description.
Available rpmbuild rebuild options :
--with : showversion expliciterrors makeweb
--without : indexes
- Should probably not be marked as %config
%config %{_unitdir}/thttpd.service
- Add gcc as a BR
- %{__make} %{?_smp_mflags} → %make_build
- Remove the commented prt:
# (list SUBDIRS to exclude "cgi-src")
#%make_build SUBDIRS="extras" WEBDIR=%{webroot} STATICFLAG="" \
#CCOPT="%{optflags} -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64"
- Can't you use sed instead of perl -pi -e?
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
Note: No gcc, gcc-c++ or clang found in BuildRequires
See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:C_and_C%2B%2B
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: 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]: 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: "BSD (2 clause)", "Unknown or generated", "NTP". 29 files have
unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/bob/packaging/review/thttpd/review-thttpd/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /var/www(cherokee, lua-wsapi,
httpd-filesystem)
[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.
[x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 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 uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: No %config files under /usr.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not
[Bug 1622694] Review Request: discord-irc - Connects Discord and IRC channels by sending messages back and forth
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622694 --- Comment #3 from Ben Rosser --- Hey, thanks for diving through this pile of node packages. Much appreciated! Let me know if I can review something in return for you. You are right that I forgot the systemd snippets-- for some reason I thought they'd been replaced by file trigger magic. Whoops. Once I import and build the other packages I'll fix this (and the ownership issue) and upload a new spec. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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
[Bug 1622618] Review Request: nodejs-tweetnacl-util - Some string encoding utilities
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622618 Ben Rosser changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |nodejs-tweenacl-util - Some |nodejs-tweetnacl-util - |string encoding utilities |Some string encoding ||utilities -- 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
[Bug 1623217] Review Request: libmpris-qt5 - Qt and QML MPRIS interface and adaptor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623217 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|POST Assignee|anto.tra...@gmail.com |zebo...@gmail.com Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #6 from Robert-André Mauchin --- (In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #4) > Robert-André Mauchin > > This review request is already assigned; please, avoid to force every time, > so that reviewer does not waste time in vain. Sorry, Mosquito sends me the links directly, I had already started working. (In reply to sensor.wen from comment #5) > Thank you, Antonio. This is a small episode. We can continue to package > review. :) 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
[Bug 1623217] Review Request: libmpris-qt5 - Qt and QML MPRIS interface and adaptor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623217 --- Comment #5 from sensor@gmail.com --- Thank you, Antonio. This is a small episode. We can continue to package 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 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
[Bug 1623138] Review Request: direwolf - Sound Card-based AX.25 TNC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623138 --- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/direwolf -- 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
[Bug 1623215] Review Request: libdbusextended-qt5 - Extended DBus for Qt
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623215 --- Comment #5 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libdbusextended-qt5 -- 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
[Bug 1622761] Review Request: R-scales - Scale Functions for Visualization
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622761 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- R-scales-1.0.0-1.fc29 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 29. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-097c2c39a4 -- 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
[Bug 1622761] Review Request: R-scales - Scale Functions for Visualization
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622761 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|MODIFIED --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- R-scales-1.0.0-1.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-ba9d81f7f1 -- 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
[Bug 1623220] Review Request: python-mmdzanata - Tools for working with translations of modulemd
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623220 --- Comment #1 from Stephen Gallagher --- Spec URL: https://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/packagereview/python-mmdzanata/python-mmdzanata.spec SRPM URL: https://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/packagereview/python-mmdzanata/python-mmdzanata-0.5-1.fc29.src.rpm COPR Build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/sgallagh/mmdzanata/ This version properly includes the COPYING file referenced in the source header comments. -- 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
[Bug 1615640] Review Request: classification-banner - Displays Classification Banner for a Graphical Session
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1615640 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2018-08-28 15:58:58 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- classification-banner-1.6.7-1.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 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
[Bug 1623138] Review Request: direwolf - Sound Card-based AX.25 TNC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623138
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 ---
- Add a comment explaining why the patch is needed
Package approved.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or generated", "BSD (4 clause)",
"BSD (3 clause)", "ISC", "LGPL (v2.1 or later)". 158 files have
unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/bob/packaging/review/direwolf/review-direwolf/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[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.
[ ]: 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 102400 bytes in 18 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
direwolf-debuginfo , direwolf-debugsource , direwolf-doc
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]:
[Bug 1623217] Review Request: libmpris-qt5 - Qt and QML MPRIS interface and adaptor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623217 --- Comment #4 from Antonio Trande --- Robert-André Mauchin This review request is already assigned; please, avoid to force every time, so that reviewer does not waste time in vain. -- 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
[Bug 1623215] Review Request: libdbusextended-qt5 - Extended DBus for Qt
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623215 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |POST Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Robert-André Mauchin --- LGTM, 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
[Bug 1623217] Review Request: libmpris-qt5 - Qt and QML MPRIS interface and adaptor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623217 --- Comment #3 from sensor@gmail.com --- https://github.com/FZUG/deepin-desktop/commit/a9f2451450f8a5bb46282848054f8d119709e7f2 Thank you. I fixed. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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
[Bug 1623217] Review Request: libmpris-qt5 - Qt and QML MPRIS interface and adaptor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623217
--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
- License shorthand is incorrect, it should be: LGPLv2+
- Add gcc-c++ as a BR
- New rules forbid using glob * for the SONAME major version. Instead be more
specific:
%{_libdir}/libmpris-qt5.so.1*
- Own these directories: /usr/lib64/qt5/qml/org/nemomobile/mpris,
/usr/include/qt5/MprisQt, /usr/lib64/qt5/qml/org/nemomobile
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
Note: No gcc, gcc-c++ or clang found in BuildRequires
See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:C_and_C%2B%2B
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later.
[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]: 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: "LGPL (v2.1 or later)", "Unknown or generated", "LGPL (v2.1)".
18 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/bob/packaging/review/libmpris-qt5/review-libmpris-
qt5/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
Note: No known owner of /usr/lib64/qt5/qml/org/nemomobile/mpris,
/usr/include/qt5/MprisQt, /usr/lib64/qt5/qml/org/nemomobile
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[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 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]: 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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} =
[Bug 1623215] Review Request: libdbusextended-qt5 - Extended DBus for Qt
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623215 --- Comment #3 from sensor@gmail.com --- Thanks, Antonio and Robert. I fixed. https://github.com/FZUG/deepin-desktop/commit/66bdc84f0dd35b7a623c0964c809bef2ce8478f2 -- 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
[Bug 1623215] Review Request: libdbusextended-qt5 - Extended DBus for Qt
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623215 Antonio Trande changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW Assignee|anto.tra...@gmail.com |nob...@fedoraproject.org Flags|fedora-review? | --- Comment #2 from Antonio Trande --- I'm leaving review to Robert. -- 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
[Bug 1623215] Review Request: libdbusextended-qt5 - Extended DBus for Qt
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623215
--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
- License shorthand is incorrect, it should be: LGPLv2+
- Add gcc-c++ as a BR
- Own this directory: /usr/include/qt5/DBusExtended
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
Note: No gcc, gcc-c++ or clang found in BuildRequires
See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:C_and_C%2B%2B
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later.
[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]: 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: "LGPL (v2.1 or later)", "Unknown or generated", "LGPL (v2.1)".
8 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/bob/packaging/review/libdbusextended-qt5/review-libdbusextended-
qt5/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
Note: No known owner of /usr/include/qt5/DBusExtended
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[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 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]: 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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
libdbusextended-qt5-debuginfo , libdbusextended-qt5-debugsource
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Description and
[Bug 1623215] Review Request: libdbusextended-qt5 - Extended DBus for Qt
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623215 Antonio Trande changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|anto.tra...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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
[Bug 1623220] Review Request: python-mmdzanata - Tools for working with translations of modulemd
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623220 Petr Šabata changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||psab...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|psab...@redhat.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
[Bug 1623217] Review Request: libmpris-qt5 - Qt and QML MPRIS interface and adaptor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623217 Antonio Trande changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1623215 --- Comment #1 from Antonio Trande --- No matching package to install: 'pkgconfig(dbusextended-qt5)' Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623215 [Bug 1623215] Review Request: libdbusextended-qt5 - Extended DBus for Qt -- 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
[Bug 1623215] Review Request: libdbusextended-qt5 - Extended DBus for Qt
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623215 Antonio Trande changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1623217 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623217 [Bug 1623217] Review Request: libmpris-qt5 - Qt and QML MPRIS interface and adaptor -- 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
[Bug 1622127] Review Request: rust-zram-generator - Systemd unit generator for zram devices
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622127 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|MODIFIED --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- rust-zram-generator-0.1.1-1.fc29 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 29. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-999c047709 -- 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
[Bug 1623217] Review Request: libmpris-qt5 - Qt and QML MPRIS interface and adaptor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623217 Antonio Trande changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|anto.tra...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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
[Bug 1623220] New: Review Request: python-mmdzanata - Tools for working with translations of modulemd
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623220 Bug ID: 1623220 Summary: Review Request: python-mmdzanata - Tools for working with translations of modulemd 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-mmdzanata/python-mmdzanata.spec SRPM URL: https://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/packagereview/python-mmdzanata/python-mmdzanata-0.4-1.fc29.src.rpm Description: Provides a library and tools for dealing with translatable strings in modulemd documents. Fedora Account System Username:sgallagh -- 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
[Bug 1465889] Tracking: Deepin Desktop related package review tracker
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1465889 sensor@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1623217 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623217 [Bug 1623217] Review Request: libmpris-qt5 - Qt and QML MPRIS interface and adaptor -- 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
[Bug 1623217] Review Request: libmpris-qt5 - Qt and QML MPRIS interface and adaptor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623217 sensor@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1465889 ||(DeepinDEPackageReview) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1465889 [Bug 1465889] Tracking: Deepin Desktop related package review tracker -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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
[Bug 1623217] New: Review Request: libmpris-qt5 - Qt and QML MPRIS interface and adaptor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623217 Bug ID: 1623217 Summary: Review Request: libmpris-qt5 - Qt and QML MPRIS interface and adaptor Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: sensor@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org SPEC: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/mosquito/deepin/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00791905-libmpris-qt5/libmpris-qt5.spec SRPM: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/mosquito/deepin/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00791905-libmpris-qt5/libmpris-qt5-0.1.0-1.fc30.src.rpm Description: Qt and QML MPRIS interface and adaptor Fedora Account System Username: mosquito -- 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
[Bug 1465889] Tracking: Deepin Desktop related package review tracker
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1465889 sensor@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1623215 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623215 [Bug 1623215] Review Request: libdbusextended-qt5 - Extended DBus for Qt -- 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
[Bug 1623215] Review Request: libdbusextended-qt5 - Extended DBus for Qt
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623215 sensor@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1465889 ||(DeepinDEPackageReview) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1465889 [Bug 1465889] Tracking: Deepin Desktop related package review tracker -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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
[Bug 1623215] New: Review Request: libdbusextended-qt5 - Extended DBus for Qt
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623215 Bug ID: 1623215 Summary: Review Request: libdbusextended-qt5 - Extended DBus for Qt Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: sensor@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org SPEC: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/mosquito/deepin/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00791900-libdbusextended-qt5/libdbusextended-qt5.spec SRPM: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/mosquito/deepin/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00791900-libdbusextended-qt5/libdbusextended-qt5-0.0.3-1.fc30.src.rpm Description: Extended DBus for Qt Fedora Account System Username: mosquito -- 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
[Bug 1613570] Review Request: msgpack-d - A pure D implementation of MessagePack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1613570
Robert-André Mauchin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zebo...@gmail.com
--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
Proposal to port it to Meson:
# debug info seem not works with D compiler
%global debug_package %{nil}
%global major_version 1
%global minor_version 0
%global patch_version 0
%global pre beta.7
Name: msgpack-d
Version:%{major_version}.%{minor_version}.%{patch_version}
Release:0.1%{?pre:.%{pre}}%{?dist}
Summary:MessagePack for D is a pure D implementation of MessagePack
Summary(fr):MessagePack pour D est une implémentation en D de MessagePack
License:Boost
URL:https://github.com/msgpack/msgpack-d
Source0:
%url/archive/v%{version}%{?pre:-%{pre}}/%{name}-%{version}%{?pre:-%{pre}}.tar.gz
Patch0:
https://patch-diff.githubusercontent.com/raw/msgpack/msgpack-d/pull/107.patch#/0001-Add-Meson-build-definition.patch
Patch1:
https://patch-diff.githubusercontent.com/raw/msgpack/msgpack-d/pull/106.patch#/0002-Fix-line-endings.patch
ExclusiveArch: %{ldc_arches}
BuildRequires: ldc meson
Requires: ldc-phobos ldc-druntime
%description
MessagePack is a binary-based JSON-like serialization library.
%description -l fr
MessagePack est une bibliothèque de sérialisation ressemblant à un format
JSON en binaire.
%packagedevel
Summary:Development files for %{name}
Summary(fr):Fichiers de développement pour %{name}
Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
%description devel
msgpack-d-devel package contains header files for developing D applications
that use msgpack-d.
%description devel -l fr
Le paquet msgpack-d-devel contient les fichiers d'entêtes pour développer
des applications en D utilisant msgpack-d.
%package geany-tags
Summary:Support for enable autocompletion in geany
Summary(fr):Support pour activer l'auto-complétion dans geany
Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
BuildArch: noarch
BuildRequires: geany
Requires: geany
%description geany-tags
Enable autocompletion for msgpack-d library in geany (IDE)
%description -l fr geany-tags
Active l'autocompletion pour pour la bibliothèque msgpack-d dans geany (IDE)
%prep
%autosetup -p1 -n %{name}-%{version}%{?pre:-%{pre}}
# temp geany config directory for allow geany to generate tags
mkdir geany_config
%build
LDFLAGS='-Wl,-z,relro -Wl,-z,now' %meson
%meson_build
# generate doc
src_dir='src'
for f in ${sources[@]}; do
d_path=$(dirname ${f});
d_file=$(basename ${f});
doc_file=html/${d_path/${src_dir}}/${d_file/.d/.html};
ldc2 -I "${src_dir}" -o- -c $f -Df $"{doc_file}" html/candydoc/candy.ddoc
html/candydoc/modules.ddoc;
done
# generate geany tags
sources=$(find "${src_dir}" -name '*.d')
geany -c geany_config -g %{name}.d.tags ${sources[@]}
%install
%meson_install
# geany tags
mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/geany/tags/
install -pm0644 %{name}.d.tags %{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/geany/tags/
%check
%meson_test
%ldconfig_scriptlets
%files
%license LICENSE_1_0.txt
%doc README.markdown
%{_libdir}/lib%{name}.so.%{version}
%{_libdir}/lib%{name}.so.%{major_version}
%files devel
%doc html example
%{_includedir}/d/msgpack
%{_libdir}/pkgconfig/%{name}.pc
%{_libdir}/lib%{name}.so
%files geany-tags
%{_datadir}/geany/tags/%{name}.d.tags
%changelog
* Wed Aug 1 2018 MERCIER Jonathan -
1.0.0-0.1.beta.7
- Initial release
==
I sent a PR upstream for it: https://github.com/msgpack/msgpack-d/pull/107
--
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
[Bug 1622127] Review Request: rust-zram-generator - Systemd unit generator for zram devices
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622127 --- Comment #6 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-zram-generator -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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
[Bug 1622127] Review Request: rust-zram-generator - Systemd unit generator for zram devices
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622127 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |zram-generator - Systemd|rust-zram-generator - |unit generator for zram |Systemd unit generator for |devices |zram devices -- 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
[Bug 1622127] Review Request: zram-generator - Systemd unit generator for zram devices
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622127 --- Comment #5 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek --- Oops, I screwed up here. The spec file is named correctly, but the review request and my repo request were missing "rust-". I'll re-request the repo. Sorry for the trouble. -- 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
[Bug 1512217] Tracking: Pantheon Desktop related package review tracker
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1512217 Bug 1512217 depends on bug 1622978, which changed state. Bug 1622978 Summary: Review Request: elementary-code - Code editor from elementary https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622978 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
[Bug 1622978] Review Request: elementary-code - Code editor from elementary
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622978 Fabio Valentini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2018-08-28 13:43:03 --- Comment #4 from Fabio Valentini --- Imported and built: rawhide: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1140167 f29: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1140168 -- 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
[Bug 1622127] Review Request: zram-generator - Systemd unit generator for zram devices
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622127 --- Comment #4 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/zram-generator -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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
[Bug 1512217] Tracking: Pantheon Desktop related package review tracker
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1512217 Bug 1512217 depends on bug 1622965, which changed state. Bug 1622965 Summary: Review Request: elementary-files - File manager from elementary https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622965 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
[Bug 1622965] Review Request: elementary-files - File manager from elementary
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622965 Fabio Valentini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2018-08-28 13:32:35 --- Comment #4 from Fabio Valentini --- Removed unused pixmaps, imported and built: rawhide: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1140165 f29: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1140166 -- 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
[Bug 1622947] Review Request: elementary-music - Music player and library from elementary
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622947 Fabio Valentini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2018-08-28 13:05:53 --- Comment #4 from Fabio Valentini --- Imported and built: rawhide: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1140157 f29: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1140160 -- 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
[Bug 1512217] Tracking: Pantheon Desktop related package review tracker
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1512217 Bug 1512217 depends on bug 1622947, which changed state. Bug 1622947 Summary: Review Request: elementary-music - Music player and library from elementary https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622947 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
[Bug 1623188] Review Request: thttpd - tiny, turbo, throttleable lightweight HTTP server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623188 --- Comment #1 from Stuart D Gathman --- This is an unretire request. cons: lighttpd is a good alternative to thttpd. Upstream does not sign, provide checksums, or use https for source releases. pros: tiny. throttling. No forking. Low memory. Very useful for serving a few files from a laptop. -- 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
[Bug 1623188] New: Review Request: thttpd - tiny, turbo, throttleable lightweight HTTP server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623188 Bug ID: 1623188 Summary: Review Request: thttpd - tiny, turbo, throttleable lightweight HTTP server Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: stu...@gathman.org QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://gathman.org/linux/SPECS/thttpd.spec SRPM URL: https://gathman.org/linux/f28/src/thttpd-2.29-1.fc28.src.rpm Description: Thttpd is a very compact no-frills httpd serving daemon that can handle very high loads. While lacking many of the advanced features of Apache, thttpd operates without forking and is extremely efficient in memory use. Basic support for cgi scripts, authentication, and ssi is provided for. Advanced features include the ability to throttle traffic. Fedora Account System Username: sdgathman -- 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
[Bug 1622978] Review Request: elementary-code - Code editor from elementary
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622978 --- Comment #3 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/elementary-code -- 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
[Bug 1622965] Review Request: elementary-files - File manager from elementary
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622965 --- Comment #3 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/elementary-files -- 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
[Bug 1622947] Review Request: elementary-music - Music player and library from elementary
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622947 --- Comment #3 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/elementary-music -- 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
[Bug 1622789] Review Request: f29-backgrounds - Fedora 29 default desktop background
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622789 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|MODIFIED --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- desktop-backgrounds-29.0.0-1.fc29 f29-backgrounds-29.0.0-2.fc29 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 29. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-1120fca003 -- 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
[Bug 1622978] Review Request: elementary-code - Code editor from elementary
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622978 --- Comment #2 from Fabio Valentini --- Thank you for the review! https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/7842 https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/7843 -- 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
[Bug 1622965] Review Request: elementary-files - File manager from elementary
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622965 --- Comment #2 from Fabio Valentini --- Ah, I forgot about the empty file. I'll remove it at import. Thank you for the review! https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/7840 https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/7841 -- 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
[Bug 1622947] Review Request: elementary-music - Music player and library from elementary
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622947 --- Comment #2 from Fabio Valentini --- Thank you for the review! https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/7838 https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/7839 -- 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
[Bug 1623138] New: Review Request: direwolf - Sound Card-based AX.25 TNC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623138 Bug ID: 1623138 Summary: Review Request: direwolf - Sound Card-based AX.25 TNC Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: m...@domsch.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://domsch.com/fedora/sdr/direwolf.spec SRPM URL: https://domsch.com/fedora/sdr/direwolf-1.5-0.1.beta4.fc28.src.rpm Description: Dire Wolf is a modern software replacement for the old 1980's style TNC built with special hardware. Without any additional software, it can perform as an APRS GPS Tracker, Digipeater, Internet Gateway (IGate), APRStt gateway. It can also be used as a virtual TNC for other applications such as APRSIS32, UI-View32, Xastir, APRS-TW, YAAC, UISS, Linux AX25, SARTrack, RMS Express, BPQ32, Outpost PM, and many others. Fedora Account System Username: mdomsch -- 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
[Bug 1622717] Review Request: addrwatch - Monitoring IPv4/ IPv6 and Ethernet address pairings
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622717 --- Comment #5 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/addrwatch -- 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
[Bug 1622761] Review Request: R-scales - Scale Functions for Visualization
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622761 --- Comment #3 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/R-scales -- 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
[Bug 1622789] Review Request: f29-backgrounds - Fedora 29 default desktop background
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622789 --- Comment #5 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/f29-backgrounds -- 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
[Bug 1342724] Review Request: libunibreak - A Unicode line-breaking library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1342724 --- Comment #8 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libunibreak -- 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
[Bug 1547757] Review Request: python-molecule - Molecule is designed to aid in the development and testing of Ansible roles
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1547757 Tadej Janež changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED CC||tade...@nez.si Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2018-08-28 08:26:33 --- Comment #9 from Tadej Janež --- python-molecule is available in F27+: https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/python-molecule -- 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
[Bug 1622978] Review Request: elementary-code - Code editor from elementary
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622978
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 =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "LGPL (v3 or later)", "GPL (v2 or later)", "LGPL (v3)",
"Unknown or generated", "GPL (v3 or later)". 381 files have unknown
license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review
/elementary-code/review-elementary-code/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[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.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: The spec file handles locales properly.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: 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 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]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or
desktop-file-validate if there is such a file.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package 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:
[-]: Avoid bundling fonts in non-fonts packages.
Note: Package contains font files
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query
[Bug 1622965] Review Request: elementary-files - File manager from elementary
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622965
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 ---
- Remove this empty file: elementary-files.x86_64: E: zero-length
/usr/share/pixmaps/io.elementary.files/thumbnail_frame.png
Package approved.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "LGPL (v3.0)", "LGPL (v2 or later)", "GPL (v2 or later)", "GPL
(v3 or later)", "Unknown or generated", "LGPL (v3 or later)", "LGPL",
"BSD (2 clause)", "LGPL (v3)". 455 files have unknown license.
Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review
/elementary-files/review-elementary-files/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
Note: No known owner of /usr/share/locale/mo,
/usr/share/locale/mo/LC_MESSAGES
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/include/pantheon-files-
widgets(pantheon-files-devel), /usr/include/pantheon-files-core
(pantheon-files-devel)
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: The spec file handles locales properly.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: 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 2 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or
desktop-file-validate if there is such a file.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package 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
[Bug 1584973] Review Request: golang-github-git-lfs-netrc - A Golang package for reading and writing netrc files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1584973 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- golang-github-git-lfs-netrc-0-0.1.20180827gite0e9ca4.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-2018-1916746967 -- 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
[Bug 1622947] Review Request: elementary-music - Music player and library from elementary
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622947
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 =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "LGPL (v2 or later)", "LGPL (v3)", "Unknown or generated". 463
files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/bob/packaging/review/elementary-music/review-elementary-
music/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[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.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: The spec file handles locales properly.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: 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 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]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or
desktop-file-validate if there is such a file.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package 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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} =
[Bug 1622717] Review Request: addrwatch - Monitoring IPv4/ IPv6 and Ethernet address pairings
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622717 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |POST Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Robert-André Mauchin --- All 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
[Bug 1622761] Review Request: R-scales - Scale Functions for Visualization
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622761
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 =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Unknown or generated". 139 files have unknown license.
Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/bob/packaging/review/R-scales/review-R-scales/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[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.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
R:
[x]: Package contains the mandatory BuildRequires.
[x]: The package has the standard %install section.
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in R
-scales-debuginfo , R-scales-debugsource
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from
[Bug 1622331] Review Request: R-RColorBrewer - ColorBrewer Palettes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622331 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- R-RColorBrewer-1.1.2-1.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-a263abea3f -- 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
