[Bug 1824016] Review Request: neatvnc - a liberally licensed VNC server library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1824016
Aleksei Bavshin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||alebast...@gmail.com
--- Comment #1 from Aleksei Bavshin ---
Some things to address before formal review:
> License: ISC
ISC and MIT and Unlicense (with comment about bundled miniz)
Also, `Provides: bundled(miniz) = 2.1.0` with a comment that it's already
removed in upstream master.
> BuildRequires: cmake
Not necessary, all dependencies are shipping pkgconfig files. CMake is only
required when you know that there's dependency that does not have pkgconfig
file but provides cmake modules.
> %files
> %{_libdir}/lib%{name}.so.*
Please, specify at least one element of SONAME to avoid unnoticed incompatible
SONAME changes[1]. I.e. %{_libdir}/lib%{name}.so.0*
> %{_includedir}/*
I'd prefer this to be more specific, but that's just nitpicking.
> cpu = host_machine.cpu_family()
>
> if cpu == 'x86_64'
> c_args += '-mavx'
> elif cpu == 'arm'
> c_args += '-mfpu=neon'
> endif
It's better to remove that from meson.build with downstream patch. Upstream
issue[2] mentions that at least x86_64 works fine without -mavx, although it
does not specify if there's any noticeable performance loss.
IIRC, Fedora baseline for x86_64 is K8 (no avx support) and for ARM - hardware
without neon instruction set support. I could be wrong about ARM, but it's
still better to keep optimization limited to distribution-wide optflags.
[1]
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_listing_shared_library_files
[2] https://github.com/any1/neatvnc/issues/21
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1823265] Review Request: wayvnc - A VNC server for wlroots based Wayland compositors
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1823265 --- Comment #3 from Aleksei Bavshin --- (In reply to Bob Hepple from comment #2) > > Question: once neatvnc is approved it will take some time to be available in > koji - maybe a week or more. During that time, is there any way we can > progress wayvnc in koji? Yes, you can add neatvnc to buildroot override[1] and once koji applies override (15-30 min) you can build wayvnc. You don't need to do that for rawhide as it's configured to add packages to buildroot with just a minor delay. However, using chain build[2] is still recommended. Note that if you are using buildroot override for dependent packages, it also makes sense to publish them in one bodhi updade. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Bodhi/BuildRootOverrides [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Using_the_Koji_build_system#Chained_builds -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1823265] Review Request: wayvnc - A VNC server for wlroots based Wayland compositors
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1823265 --- Comment #2 from Bob Hepple --- Thanks Aleksei, Here's the separated neatvnc RR: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1824016 New build of wayvnc based on that: SPEC URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/wef/wayvnc/fedora-31-x86_64/01338261-wayvnc/wayvnc.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/wef/wayvnc/fedora-31-x86_64/01338261-wayvnc/wayvnc-0.1.2-2.fc31.src.rpm Question: once neatvnc is approved it will take some time to be available in koji - maybe a week or more. During that time, is there any way we can progress wayvnc in koji? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1824016] New: Review Request: neatvnc - a liberally licensed VNC server library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1824016 Bug ID: 1824016 Summary: Review Request: neatvnc - a liberally licensed VNC server library Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: bob.hep...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/wef/wayvnc/fedora-31-x86_64/01338222-neatvnc/neatvnc.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/wef/wayvnc/fedora-31-x86_64/01338222-neatvnc/neatvnc-0.1.0-1.fc31.src.rpm Description: This is a liberally licensed VNC server library that's intended to be fast and neat. Note: This is a beta release, so the interface is not yet stable. Fedora Account System Username: wef -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1746587] Review Request: amavis - Email filter with virus scanner and spamassassin support
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1746587 Hirotaka Wakabayashi changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |POST -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805928] Review Request: elementary-planner - Task manager with Todoist support designed for GNU/Linux
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805928 --- Comment #15 from Artem --- No prob at all. :) I almost always try to build first without LTO and then with LTO and trying to see at least any difference in footprint since not always possible to do some benchmarks. And TBH this is not the case with 'planner' and it even produce a little bit bigger binary with LTO which is very very rare case, at least in my experience. So i started unwittingly to think that you did your own research and found this and instead of just saying this clearly asking meta questions. Usually in similar Vala apps not to much profit from enabling LTO but still some. Anyway i already rebuilt it (for Rawhide at this moment) without LTO. Just some interesting facts: few libs which i tested have up to 40% profit in terms of produced binary size. Asked many times compiler guys and they said that nowadays the only drawback with LTO is that it can produce less useful debug info which can make things harder to debug. As for naming package this is first elementary package which i named with elementary prefix and only because of we already have package with 'planner' name. And i really didn't know in what cases some elementary apps should use this prefix until you explain. I found one your package 'elementary-code' and i though you named it like that for the same reason because there is already exist package 'code'. :) For sure we need to rename it to 'planner' then, but there is still a problem that 'planner' already build for F31... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805928] Review Request: elementary-planner - Task manager with Todoist support designed for GNU/Linux
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805928 --- Comment #14 from Fabio Valentini --- (In reply to Artem from comment #13) > Seems like we have some misunderstanding there, but that's obviously since > you asking meta questions. So what's exactly a problem here? You still > didn't said. What is a real fix for this specifically case since there > already 'planner' package exist in Fedora? And why you asking like i did > something criminal since *you* as person who responsible for Elementary > stack didn't wrote any guidelines for it? Why should there be specific Guidelines for elementary stuff? All their projects are now 99% standard, simple meson projects, where the general guidelines are definitely enough. There are also no Packaging Guidelines for GNOME, KDE, XFCE, etc. ... because it's not necessary. That said, there *are* Guidelines for package Naming, specifically: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Naming/#_general_naming But well, the package is named "elementary-planner" now, even though it's not an official elementary project. At least on NixOS, they have the same problem and they also named it "elementary-planner" despite it not being an official elementary project, so at least some distros are somewhat consistent here. Also note that the original "planner" package is also no longer present on fedora 32+ (it was retired, probably because it didn't build anymore on F31+, or because somebody just orphaned it), so you could eventually rename this package and drop the "elementary-" prefix. > > Fair enough, but the packaging Guidelines still specify that you should > > document *why* you're modifying build flags. > > In case with LTO this is obvious why and as you already seen other > maintainers not specify too why they build with LTO. But sometimes i > document even how much profit we got there in percentage ratio, see [1]. So > i am not "arbitrarily" building with -flto, as you stated. Side note: I have not seen any package enabling LTO before I looked at this one. There may be "many", but this is the first one I'm interacting with. So I was just surprised that it's there without a comment. While you're right that it might be obvious what -flto does, but it might not be obvious to everybody! That's why a comment is always nice, if only to say "this flag enables link-time optimizations to make the application run faster" ... > > The Change about enabling LTO by default also has no bearing on this, > > because it would change the *default* build flags, and thereby *by > > definiton* moving the goalpost for everybody. > > One again, since you asking meta question i have no idea what has bearing on > this and what doesn't for you. And you quoting wrong thesis. Thesis was why > i enabling LTO in *some* my package. Answer was for the same reason that > mozjs did and for the same reason why it was proposed to enable it by > default in F32. And i asked many times other maintainers about LTO > specifically and there is nothing wrong with that. > > [1] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/kakoune/blob/master/f/kakoune.spec#_3 > Why you not ask why arbitrarily mozjs [1] and firefox built with -flto and > why LTO by default proposed in F32 [2]? I suppose you wanted to say "duh, of course adding -flto makes things run faster, why is he even asking" here? I probably misunderstood this paragraph when I first read it ... I know what compiling with -flto does, I wasn't asking for myself, but for people who might *not know*. Maybe that answers your question? --- I'm sorry if my questions seemed like nonsense to you. That was not my intention. If you just said "I'm not modifying the build flags (so this is okay), I'm only adding LTO to make this run faster, maybe I'll add this as a comment to the .spec file with the next update" I would have been 100% satisfied. Again, I apologize if my questions were too "meta". -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1814682] Review Request: rshim - rshim driver for Mellanox BlueField SoC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1814682 --- Comment #46 from l...@mellanox.com --- Thanks for help the debugging! Below is updated version trying to solve these issues. Spec URL: https://github.com/Mellanox/rshim-user-space/releases/download/rshim-2.0.3/rshim.spec SRPM URL: https://github.com/Mellanox/rshim-user-space/releases/download/rshim-2.0.3/rshim-2.0.3-1.fc31.src.rpm koji build URL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=43397845 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1822971] Review Request: notcurses - character graphics and TUI library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1822971 David Cantrell changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1773720] Review Request: golang-github-haproxytech-dataplaneapi - HAProxy Data Plane API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1773720 Ryan O'Hara changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1802370] Review Request: golang-github-francoispqt-gojay - Fastest JSON encoder/decoder with powerful stream API for Golang
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1802370 Olivier Lemasle changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(o.lemasle@gmail.c | |om) | --- Comment #2 from Olivier Lemasle --- Sorry for the delay, I was waiting to golang-github-viant-toolbox to be "unbootstrapped", since golang-github-francoispqt-gojay depends on golang(github.com/viant/toolbox/url), which is not provided by golang-github-viant-toolbox's bootstrap build. Finally, I built it myself locally (with its dependencies golang-github-viant-assertly and golang-github-viant-toolbox unbootstrapped). Just one thing: is it normal to package the examples directory as %godoc even in the *binary* package? golang-github-francoispqt-gojay-1.2.13-1.fc33.x86_64.rpm /usr/bin/gojay /usr/lib/.build-id /usr/lib/.build-id/8b /usr/lib/.build-id/8b/605f02b9d37b065476634aa3fa482a14edb804 /usr/share/doc/golang-github-francoispqt-gojay /usr/share/doc/golang-github-francoispqt-gojay/README.md /usr/share/doc/golang-github-francoispqt-gojay/examples /usr/share/doc/golang-github-francoispqt-gojay/examples/encode-decode-map /usr/share/doc/golang-github-francoispqt-gojay/examples/encode-decode-map/main.go /usr/share/doc/golang-github-francoispqt-gojay/examples/fuzz /usr/share/doc/golang-github-francoispqt-gojay/examples/fuzz/Makefile /usr/share/doc/golang-github-francoispqt-gojay/examples/fuzz/main.go /usr/share/doc/golang-github-francoispqt-gojay/examples/http-benchmarks /usr/share/doc/golang-github-francoispqt-gojay/examples/http-benchmarks/Makefile /usr/share/doc/golang-github-francoispqt-gojay/examples/http-benchmarks/README.md /usr/share/doc/golang-github-francoispqt-gojay/examples/http-benchmarks/gojay /usr/share/doc/golang-github-francoispqt-gojay/examples/http-benchmarks/gojay/main.go /usr/share/doc/golang-github-francoispqt-gojay/examples/http-benchmarks/post.lua /usr/share/doc/golang-github-francoispqt-gojay/examples/http-benchmarks/standard /usr/share/doc/golang-github-francoispqt-gojay/examples/http-benchmarks/standard/main.go /usr/share/doc/golang-github-francoispqt-gojay/examples/http-json /usr/share/doc/golang-github-francoispqt-gojay/examples/http-json/main.go /usr/share/doc/golang-github-francoispqt-gojay/examples/websocket /usr/share/doc/golang-github-francoispqt-gojay/examples/websocket/client /usr/share/doc/golang-github-francoispqt-gojay/examples/websocket/client/client.go /usr/share/doc/golang-github-francoispqt-gojay/examples/websocket/comm /usr/share/doc/golang-github-francoispqt-gojay/examples/websocket/comm/comm.go /usr/share/doc/golang-github-francoispqt-gojay/examples/websocket/main.go /usr/share/doc/golang-github-francoispqt-gojay/examples/websocket/server /usr/share/doc/golang-github-francoispqt-gojay/examples/websocket/server/server.go /usr/share/licenses/golang-github-francoispqt-gojay /usr/share/licenses/golang-github-francoispqt-gojay/LICENSE Otherwise: - MIT license ok - Spec + changelog format ok - Naming guidelines + packaging guidelines ok - Builds in mock ok Rpmlint --- golang-github-francoispqt-gojay.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US performant -> perform ant, perform-ant, performance golang-github-francoispqt-gojay.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US performant -> perform ant, perform-ant, performance golang-github-francoispqt-gojay.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gojay 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1822971] Review Request: notcurses - character graphics and TUI library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1822971 David Cantrell changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|dcantr...@redhat.com Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1773720] Review Request: golang-github-haproxytech-dataplaneapi - HAProxy Data Plane API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1773720 --- Comment #14 from Brandon Perkins --- $ rpm -qp --requires golang-github-haproxytech-dataplaneapi-1.2.4-7.fc33.x86_64.rpm | grep ^haproxy haproxy >= 2.0 $ rpm -qp --requires golang-github-haproxytech-dataplaneapi-1.2.4-7.fc33.x86_64.rpm | grep ^logrotate logrotate $ rpm -qp --requires golang-github-haproxytech-dataplaneapi-1.2.4-7.fc33.src.rpm | grep haproxytech golang(github.com/haproxytech/client-native) >= 1.2.6 golang(github.com/haproxytech/client-native/configuration) >= 1.2.6 golang(github.com/haproxytech/client-native/runtime) >= 1.2.6 golang(github.com/haproxytech/config-parser) >= 1.2.0 golang(github.com/haproxytech/config-parser/types) >= 1.2.0 golang(github.com/haproxytech/models) >= 1.2.4 $ LANG=C.utf8 rpmlint *.rpm golang-github-haproxytech-dataplaneapi-debugsource.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long C This package provides debug sources for package golang-github-haproxytech-dataplaneapi. golang-github-haproxytech-dataplaneapi-devel.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/haproxytech/dataplaneapi/.goipath 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1802362] Review Request: golang-github-viant-assertly - Arbitraty datastructure validation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1802362
Olivier Lemasle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Olivier Lemasle ---
Thank you for the changes.
Package accepted.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
= 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: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla
upstream sources. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated". 1 files have
unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/olivier/packaging/reviews/1802362-golang-github-viant-
assertly/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[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.
[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 30720 bytes in 2 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
justified.
[x]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
publishes signatures.
Note: gpgverify is not used.
[x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be
[Bug 1773720] Review Request: golang-github-haproxytech-dataplaneapi - HAProxy Data Plane API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1773720 --- Comment #13 from Brandon Perkins --- Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/bdperkin/haproxytech/master/SPECS/golang-github-haproxytech-dataplaneapi.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/bdperkin/haproxytech/fedora-31-x86_64/01337934-golang-github-haproxytech-dataplaneapi/golang-github-haproxytech-dataplaneapi-1.2.4-7.fc31.src.rpm Successful copr build: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/bdperkin/haproxytech/fedora-31-x86_64/01337934-golang-github-haproxytech-dataplaneapi/ Changelog: * Tue Apr 14 14:27:35 EST 2020 Brandon Perkins - 1.2.4-7 - Change haproxy requires to >= 2.0 as 1.9 was never packaged - Require instead of Suggest logrotate due to logging by default - Add specific versions for haproxytech BuildRequires * Wed Mar 04 14:54:06 EST 2020 Brandon Perkins - 1.2.4-6 - Use global instead of define macro - Remove defattr macro that is not needed * Mon Mar 02 15:30:56 EST 2020 Brandon Perkins - 1.2.4-5 - Clean changelog * Thu Nov 21 13:50:08 UTC 2019 Brandon Perkins - 1.2.4-4 - Suggest logrotate and fix logrotate configuration * Wed Nov 20 22:03:49 UTC 2019 Brandon Perkins - 1.2.4-3 - Add man page * Wed Nov 13 12:25:57 UTC 2019 Brandon Perkins - 1.2.4-2 - Implement systemd * Wed Nov 13 12:25:57 UTC 2019 Brandon Perkins - 1.2.4-1 - Initial 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1773719] Review Request: golang-github-haproxytech-client-native - Go client for HAProxy configuration and runtime API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1773719 --- Comment #11 from Brandon Perkins --- Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/bdperkin/haproxytech/master/SPECS/golang-github-haproxytech-client-native.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/bdperkin/haproxytech/fedora-31-x86_64/01337933-golang-github-haproxytech-client-native/golang-github-haproxytech-client-native-1.2.6-4.fc31.src.rpm Successful copr build: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/bdperkin/haproxytech/fedora-31-x86_64/01337933-golang-github-haproxytech-client-native/ Changelog: * Tue Apr 14 14:27:35 EST 2020 Brandon Perkins - 1.2.6-4 - Add specific versions for haproxytech BuildRequires * Mon Apr 13 17:29:12 EST 2020 Brandon Perkins - 1.2.6-3 - Remove runtime/README.md * Mon Mar 02 15:30:56 EST 2020 Brandon Perkins - 1.2.6-2 - Clean changelog * Wed Nov 13 12:24:19 UTC 2019 Brandon Perkins - 1.2.6-1 - Initial 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805928] Review Request: elementary-planner - Task manager with Todoist support designed for GNU/Linux
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805928 --- Comment #13 from Artem --- > Uh ... that's my point, it's *not* an elementary project. Seems like we have some misunderstanding there, but that's obviously since you asking meta questions. So what's exactly a problem here? You still didn't said. What is a real fix for this specifically case since there already 'planner' package exist in Fedora? And why you asking like i did something criminal since *you* as person who responsible for Elementary stack didn't wrote any guidelines for it? > Fair enough, but the packaging Guidelines still specify that you should > document *why* you're modifying build flags. In case with LTO this is obvious why and as you already seen other maintainers not specify too why they build with LTO. But sometimes i document even how much profit we got there in percentage ratio, see [1]. So i am not "arbitrarily" building with -flto, as you stated. > The Change about enabling LTO by default also has no bearing on this, because > it would change the *default* build flags, and thereby *by definiton* moving > the goalpost for everybody. One again, since you asking meta question i have no idea what has bearing on this and what doesn't for you. And you quoting wrong thesis. Thesis was why i enabling LTO in *some* my package. Answer was for the same reason that mozjs did and for the same reason why it was proposed to enable it by default in F32. And i asked many times other maintainers about LTO specifically and there is nothing wrong with that. [1] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/kakoune/blob/master/f/kakoune.spec#_3 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1773720] Review Request: golang-github-haproxytech-dataplaneapi - HAProxy Data Plane API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1773720
--- Comment #12 from Brandon Perkins ---
(In reply to Ryan O'Hara from comment #11)
> (In reply to Brandon Perkins from comment #10)
> > (In reply to Ryan O'Hara from comment #9)
> >
> > The /etc/logrotate.d directory is owned by the 'logrotate' package:
> >
> > $ rpm -qf /etc/logrotate.d
> > logrotate-3.15.1-1.fc31.x86_64
> >
> > This issue is properly satisfied by the logrotate 'Suggests' in the RPM:
> >
> > $ grep ^Suggests: SPECS/golang-github-haproxytech-dataplaneapi.spec
> > Suggests: logrotate
> > $ rpm -qp --suggests
> > RPMS/golang-github-haproxytech-dataplaneapi-1.2.4-5.fc31.x86_64.rpm
> > logrotate
> >
> > To me, it's better to have a possible orphan directory than to have this
> > package become the owner of the directory. And, we certainly wouldn't be
> > the first to go down this path. Quick query shows me:
> >
> > [bperkins@bperkins haproxytech]$ dnf repoquery --queryformat="%{NAME}"
> > --whatsuggests logrotate
> > mariadb-server
> > plymouth
> >
> > However, many more do the ownership thing (which just seems wrong to me):
> >
> > [bperkins@bperkins haproxytech]$ dnf repoquery --queryformat="%{NAME}"
> > --whatprovides /etc/logrotate.d
> > bes
> > copr-dist-git
> > gap-pkg-scscp
> > gerbera
> > kdm-settings
> > lightdm
> > logrotate
> > macromilter
> > openqa
> > ppp
> > psad
> > samba-common
> > sssd-common
> > yast2-filesystem
> >
> > Or, we could go down what I *really* think is wrong and just ignore the
> > issue completely (which is by far the most popular path).
> >
> > I'm personally inclined to do what I did, but I can certainly change it.
>
> Another option would be to *require* logrotate as a dependency. Thoughts?
> I'm on the fence with this one.
>
Yeah, I thought about that as well. When I reviewed the command run again, it
is in fact logging by default (which HAProxy does not do by default). So, log
rotation in this case should be the default and not the exception. I'll go
ahead and make that change.
> >
> > Using the %gopkg macro, I don't see how this could be accomplished. This
> > really doesn't seem like a critical requirement to me.
>
> I know the above warning is complaining about about the -devel subpackage,
> but I am more curious if we can do something like this:
>
> BuildRequires: golang(github.com/haproxytech/config-parser) >= 1.2.0
>
I'm happy to make that change and I'll do it for client-native as well.
> Sorry, I should have been more specific. On a related note, I saw that the
> dataplaneapi spec file has this requirement:
>
> Requires: haproxy >= 1.9
>
> We might want to make that 2.0 unless we've tested this with 1.9 -- the API
> might have changed. Plus, I never put 1.9 in Fedora.
>
Will make that change.
> >
> > Because of using the %gopkg macro, we're kind of stuck with what it creates.
> > Outside of modifying the macro (which is a non-starter), the only thing that
> > could be done would be to shorten the package name, which is also a
> > non-starter. I think it's an error we just have to live with. Unless you
> > have any other thoughts.
>
> I think at the very least we should file a bug against whatever is defining
> those macros and see if they can prevent this from happening.
Bug entered as: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1823915
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1812961] Review Request: openosc - Open Object Size Checking Library to detect buffer overflows with built-in metrics
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1812961 --- Comment #16 from yon...@cisco.com --- Regarding that OpenOSC-1.0.1 vs. openosc-1.0.1 issue, I prefer to always use lower-case openosc, to avoid any such upper-case vs. lower-case issue. When I download the tarball file, it is openosc-1.0.1.tar.gz file, however, when I extract it, the directory name is called OpenOSC-1.0.1, which is confusing. Robert, do you know how to configure github to use openosc-1.0.1 directory instead of OpenOSC-1.0.1 directory? drwxrwxr-x. 10 rtd rtd 4096 Apr 14 12:53 OpenOSC-1.0.1 -rw-rw-r--. 1 rtd rtd 482277 Apr 14 11:08 openosc-1.0.1.tar.gz -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1812961] Review Request: openosc - Open Object Size Checking Library to detect buffer overflows with built-in metrics
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1812961 --- Comment #15 from yon...@cisco.com --- Spec file updated: Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/yonhan/openosc/fedora-31-x86_64/01337903-openosc/openosc.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/yonhan/openosc/fedora-31-x86_64/01337903-openosc/openosc-1.0.1-1.fc31.src.rpm The Copr build results: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/yonhan/openosc/build/1337903/ The Copr seems not stable today, my previous 2 Copr builds failed, while the third build succeeded. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1803309] Review Request: golang-github-netflix-expect - An expect-like golang library to automate control of terminal or console based programs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803309 Joe Doss changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(j...@solidadmin.co | |m) | --- Comment #4 from Joe Doss --- Feel free to take it over Jared. Thanks! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1823265] Review Request: wayvnc - A VNC server for wlroots based Wayland compositors
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1823265
Aleksei Bavshin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||alebast...@gmail.com
--- Comment #1 from Aleksei Bavshin ---
With the existence of
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/weston/-/merge_requests/362 and the fact
that other distributions are shipping neatvnc separately, I'd suggest creating
separate package.
Contents of devel package only confirm my point:
% rpm -qlp results_wayvnc/0.1.2/1.fc32/wayvnc-devel-0.1.2-1.fc32.x86_64.rpm
/usr/include/neatvnc.h
/usr/lib64/libneatvnc.so
/usr/lib64/pkgconfig/neatvnc.pc
For meson it's preferable to convert dependency('x') directly into
BuildRequires: pkgconfig(x). Or BuildRequires: cmake(x) for the cases where
dependency does not ship .pc file and meson is using cmake to resolve it.
I don't see the reason for BR: wlroots-devel, nothing is using wlroots in both
sources. You'll need `BuildRequires: pkgconfig(pixman-1)` and `BuildRequires:
pkgconfig(libdrm)` instead.
I'd also suggest to unbundle miniz but neatvnc upstream already dropped it
(https://github.com/any1/neatvnc/commit/b44d1a1f58341ecd78cbdd91eb03865849bcf0a8)
so it's fine to wait until the next upstream release.
Would be nice to declare that sway >= 1.4 is necessary for wayvnc without
making it hard dependency. People may want to use it with wayfire >= 0.4.0 for
example.
I don't have any good ideas for that except `Requires: wlroots >= 0.10`, which
is still not good enough.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1815725] Re-Review Request: mkdocs-cinder - A clean responsive theme for the MkDocs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1815725 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-d4e501fac9 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 testing repository. In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2020-d4e501fac9 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-d4e501fac9 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1803312] Review Request: golang-github-hinshun-vt10x - Package vt10x is a vt10x terminal emulation backend
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803312 Joe Doss changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(j...@solidadmin.co | |m) | --- Comment #4 from Joe Doss --- Hey Jared, Yes, but if you want to take this over to help push it forward, I could use the help. I am stretched pretty thin right now with everything that is going on in the world. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1803312] Review Request: golang-github-hinshun-vt10x - Package vt10x is a vt10x terminal emulation backend
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803312 Jared Smith changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jsmith.fed...@gmail.com Flags||needinfo?(j...@solidadmin.co ||m) --- Comment #3 from Jared Smith --- Joe, Are you going to continue with the process of getting this package into Fedora? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1803309] Review Request: golang-github-netflix-expect - An expect-like golang library to automate control of terminal or console based programs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803309 Jared Smith changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jsmith.fed...@gmail.com Flags||needinfo?(j...@solidadmin.co ||m) --- Comment #3 from Jared Smith --- Are you going to actually build this package, now that it has been approved? If not, I'd be willing to take over the process and help get this into Fedora. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1822971] Review Request: notcurses - character graphics and TUI library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1822971 --- Comment #8 from Nick Black --- Sorry, ugh, raw spec is here: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dankamongmen/notcurses/master/tools/notcurses.spec (previous was marked up) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1823860] New: Review Request: golang-github-henvic-httpretty - Prints the HTTP requests you make with Go pretty on your terminal
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1823860 Bug ID: 1823860 Summary: Review Request: golang-github-henvic-httpretty - Prints the HTTP requests you make with Go pretty on your terminal Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: jsmith.fed...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/golang-github-henvic-httpretty/golang-github-henvic-httpretty.spec SRPM URL: https://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/golang-github-henvic-httpretty/golang-github-henvic-httpretty-0.0.5-1.fc32.src.rpm Description: Prints the HTTP requests you make with Go pretty on your terminal Fedora Account System Username: jsmith -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1773720] Review Request: golang-github-haproxytech-dataplaneapi - HAProxy Data Plane API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1773720
--- Comment #11 from Ryan O'Hara ---
(In reply to Brandon Perkins from comment #10)
> (In reply to Ryan O'Hara from comment #9)
> >
> > [ ]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
> >
> > - The license is definitely installed with the regular rpm and/or the -devel
> > package. Does this requirement also apply to debuginfo and debugsource
> > packages? I'm going to assume not.
> >
>
> So, this is a great question that, AFAICT has not been resolved:
>
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/le...@lists.fedoraproject.org/
> thread/V3JDB74XPJQVNWO7SJVVDYFP3AR6GQD4/
>
> and I don't get clarity from:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:
> LicensingGuidelines#Subpackage_Licensing
> or
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Debuginfo/
>
> I would say that we defer to the auto-generation done by the macros which
> appears to not include it.
OK. Fair enough.
> > [ ]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
> > Note: Directories without known owners: /etc/logrotate.d
> >
> > - I don't think this is optional. Having the "suggests" line is the spec
> > seems ok, but this package is creating a directory with no owner.
> >
>
> The /etc/logrotate.d directory is owned by the 'logrotate' package:
>
> $ rpm -qf /etc/logrotate.d
> logrotate-3.15.1-1.fc31.x86_64
>
> This issue is properly satisfied by the logrotate 'Suggests' in the RPM:
>
> $ grep ^Suggests: SPECS/golang-github-haproxytech-dataplaneapi.spec
> Suggests: logrotate
> $ rpm -qp --suggests
> RPMS/golang-github-haproxytech-dataplaneapi-1.2.4-5.fc31.x86_64.rpm
> logrotate
>
> To me, it's better to have a possible orphan directory than to have this
> package become the owner of the directory. And, we certainly wouldn't be
> the first to go down this path. Quick query shows me:
>
> [bperkins@bperkins haproxytech]$ dnf repoquery --queryformat="%{NAME}"
> --whatsuggests logrotate
> mariadb-server
> plymouth
>
> However, many more do the ownership thing (which just seems wrong to me):
>
> [bperkins@bperkins haproxytech]$ dnf repoquery --queryformat="%{NAME}"
> --whatprovides /etc/logrotate.d
> bes
> copr-dist-git
> gap-pkg-scscp
> gerbera
> kdm-settings
> lightdm
> logrotate
> macromilter
> openqa
> ppp
> psad
> samba-common
> sssd-common
> yast2-filesystem
>
> Or, we could go down what I *really* think is wrong and just ignore the
> issue completely (which is by far the most popular path).
>
> I'm personally inclined to do what I did, but I can certainly change it.
Another option would be to *require* logrotate as a dependency. Thoughts? I'm
on the fence with this one.
> > [ ]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
> > Note: Dirs in package are owned also by:
> >
> > - This seems like an issue with all Go modules, as mentioned above.
> >
>
> > [ ]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
> > Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in golang-
> > github-haproxytech-dataplaneapi-devel
> >
> > - Can we do this? I know upstream is versioning the releases of the various
> > dataplaneapi components. I'm not sure if this works for go packages.
> >
>
> Using the %gopkg macro, I don't see how this could be accomplished. This
> really doesn't seem like a critical requirement to me.
I know the above warning is complaining about about the -devel subpackage, but
I am more curious if we can do something like this:
BuildRequires: golang(github.com/haproxytech/config-parser) >= 1.2.0
Sorry, I should have been more specific. On a related note, I saw that the
dataplaneapi spec file has this requirement:
Requires: haproxy >= 1.9
We might want to make that 2.0 unless we've tested this with 1.9 -- the API
might have changed. Plus, I never put 1.9 in Fedora.
> >
> > Rpmlint
> > ---
> > Checking: golang-github-haproxytech-dataplaneapi-1.2.4-6.fc33.x86_64.rpm
> >
> > golang-github-haproxytech-dataplaneapi-devel-1.2.4-6.fc33.noarch.rpm
> >
> > golang-github-haproxytech-dataplaneapi-debuginfo-1.2.4-6.fc33.x86_64.rpm
> >
> > golang-github-haproxytech-dataplaneapi-debugsource-1.2.4-6.fc33.x86_64.rpm
> > golang-github-haproxytech-dataplaneapi-1.2.4-6.fc33.src.rpm
> > golang-github-haproxytech-dataplaneapi-devel.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir
> > /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/haproxytech/dataplaneapi/.goipath
> > golang-github-haproxytech-dataplaneapi-debugsource.x86_64: E:
> > description-line-too-long C This package provides debug sources for package
> > golang-github-haproxytech-dataplaneapi.
> > 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Rpmlint (debuginfo)
> > ---
> > Checking:
> > golang-github-haproxytech-dataplaneapi-debuginfo-1.2.4-6.fc33.x86_64.rpm
> > 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
> >
> >
> >
[Bug 1814682] Review Request: rshim - rshim driver for Mellanox BlueField SoC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1814682 --- Comment #45 from Alaa Hleihel (Mellanox) --- Update: We found the issue, the device was not enabled, so we couldn't read from it... [root@qualcomm-amberwing-rep2-01 pcie_read_test]# lspci - -d :c2d2 :01:00.2 DMA controller: Mellanox Technologies MT416842 BlueField SoC management interfac (prog-if 00 [8237]) Subsystem: Mellanox Technologies Device 0082 Control: I/O- Mem- BusMaster- SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B- DisINTx- Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- SERR- https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1812961] Review Request: openosc - Open Object Size Checking Library to detect buffer overflows with built-in metrics
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1812961
--- Comment #14 from yon...@cisco.com ---
Hi Robert,
Thanks for the comments!
Yes, I did try using "%autosetup -n OpenOSC-%{version}" in the openosc.spec
file, which however caused the below build error:
+ cd OpenOSC-1.0.1
/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.rNYapH: line 39: cd: OpenOSC-1.0.1: No such file or directory
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.rNYapH (%prep)
and if I change it to "%autosetup -n openosc-%{version}", then the build
succeeds.
The openosc.spec in the github wants to support more Linux distros, not just
Fedora, because some distros do not support forgeurl yet. Also the openosc.spec
in the github is intended to work for the latest version, not just a specific
release version.
My understanding for Fedora package is to use a specific stable version of
OpenOSC, not the latest version of OpenOSC. Is my understanding correct?
Let me build a new SRPM that matches exactly to the one downloaded on Github.
will submit a new Copr build very soon.
Again Thank you for your 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1823724] Rename Review Request: yarnpkg - Fast, reliable, and secure dependency management
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1823724
Stephen Gallagher changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sgall...@redhat.com
--- Comment #3 from Stephen Gallagher ---
(In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #2)
> This is weird:
>
> #%{nodejs_symlink_deps}
>
> The macro will still expand. Is that intended?
The macro happens to be a single line[1], so it will be commented-out, but
you're right. This should be
`#%%{nodejs_symlink_deps}` for safety. Or removed entirely, of course. I
suspect it's there because the standard template for Node packages would use
it, but as yarn has no dependencies on other Fedora-packaged Node modules, it's
unneeded.
[1]
```
%nodejs_sitelib %{_prefix}/lib/node_modules
%nodejs_symlink_deps %{_rpmconfigdir}/nodejs-symlink-deps %{nodejs_sitelib}
```
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1820846] Review Request: golang-github-nbutton23-zxcvbn - Zxcvbn password complexity algorithm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1820846 --- Comment #3 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/golang-github-nbutton23-zxcvbn -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1820852] Review Request: golang-github-antchfx-xpath - XPath package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1820852 --- Comment #5 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/golang-github-antchfx-xpath -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1823724] Rename Review Request: yarnpkg - Fast, reliable, and secure dependency management
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1823724
Miro Hrončok changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mhron...@redhat.com
--- Comment #2 from Miro Hrončok ---
This is weird:
#%{nodejs_symlink_deps}
The macro will still expand. Is that intended?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1820846] Review Request: golang-github-nbutton23-zxcvbn - Zxcvbn password complexity algorithm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1820846 --- Comment #2 from Fabian Affolter --- Thanks for the review. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1823319] Review Request: python-django-pglocks - Context managers for advisory locks for PostgreSQL
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1823319 Neal Gompa changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ngomp...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ngomp...@gmail.com Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Neal Gompa --- Taking this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1823319] Review Request: python-django-pglocks - Context managers for advisory locks for PostgreSQL
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1823319 --- Comment #2 from Neal Gompa --- Review notes: * Package is named per Python package naming guidelines * Package builds and installs properly * Package generally follows Fedora packaging guidelines * Package follows Python packaging guidelines Please send a PR to the project to get them to include the real license content in LICENSE.txt. There's no indicator of *which* MIT license it is under... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1815725] Re-Review Request: mkdocs-cinder - A clean responsive theme for the MkDocs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1815725 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-d4e501fac9 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-d4e501fac9 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1823117] Review Request: opensurge - 2D retro platformer inspired by Sonic games
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1823117 --- Comment #11 from Artur Iwicki --- Yeah, they probably should. I never packaged fonts before, and the Font Packaging Guidelines are quite long - plus the upstream website for the font is in Korean, which I don't speak - so I went the lazy way and asked in the fonts@ mailing lists if someone would be willing to have a go at this. https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/fo...@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/ZABSC2NULLWWLALETFGNF4UOECO2METR/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1823724] Rename Review Request: yarnpkg - Fast, reliable, and secure dependency management
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1823724 Neal Gompa changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ngomp...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ngomp...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Neal Gompa --- Spec is essentially identical minus the subpackage thing, so 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1823724] New: Rename Review Request: yarnpkg - Fast, reliable, and secure dependency management
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1823724 Bug ID: 1823724 Summary: Rename Review Request: yarnpkg - Fast, reliable, and secure dependency management Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: zsvet...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~zvetlik/yarnpkg/yarnpkg.spec SRPM URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~zvetlik/yarnpkg/yarnpkg-1.22.4-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: Fast, reliable, and secure dependency management Fedora Account System Username: zvetlik As per https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/nodejs-yarn/pull-request/3 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1823117] Review Request: opensurge - 2D retro platformer inspired by Sonic games
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1823117 --- Comment #10 from Antonio T. (sagitter) --- I guess that the font files -- /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/opensurge-0.5.1.2-4.fc31.x86_64/usr/share/opensurge/fonts/GothicA1-Medium.ttf -- /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/opensurge-0.5.1.2-4.fc31.x86_64/usr/share/opensurge/fonts/GothicA1-Bold.ttf should be packaged separately in a `hanyang-gothic-A1-fonts` sub-package (like happens with Pioneer: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/pioneer/blob/master/f/pioneer.spec#_229) and create related symlinks inside `/usr/share/opensurge/fonts/` -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1820845] Review Request: golang-github-bettercap-readline - Pure go implementation for GNU-Readline kind library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1820845 Germano Massullo changed: What|Removed |Added CC||germano.massu...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Germano Massullo --- Created attachment 1678658 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1678658=edit errors Since golang-github-nbutton23-zxcvbn is not yet in stable repository, I putted in a folder as local repo in fedora-review, but I am getting various errors. If you can help me solving them we can proceed with the review -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1773382] Review Request: home-assistant-cli - Command-line tool for Home Assistant
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1773382 Fabian Affolter changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1818602 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1818602 [Bug 1818602] Update python-jsonpath-rw to latest release -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1822971] Review Request: notcurses - character graphics and TUI library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1822971 --- Comment #7 from Nick Black --- @artur, are you my official reviewer? If so, could you PTAL (and update the fedora-review flag)? thanks muchly! SRPM: https://www.dsscaw.com/repos/dnf/notcurses-1.3.0-1.fc32.src.rpm Spec: https://github.com/dankamongmen/notcurses/blob/master/tools/notcurses.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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1725924] Review Request: pveclib - Library for simplified access to PowerISA vector operations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1725924 Dan Horák changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2020-04-14 07:46:20 --- Comment #33 from Dan Horák --- Built and included for a long time, so let's close the review. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1820852] Review Request: golang-github-antchfx-xpath - XPath package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1820852 Fabian Affolter changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #4 from Fabian Affolter --- Thanks for the review. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
