[Bug 1111691] Review Request: qore - multithreaded programming/scripting language

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691



--- Comment #44 from David Nichols  ---
(In reply to Andy Mender from comment #43)
> Super good job on the updates! :)

thank you very much!

> > Requires: %{name}-libqore%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
> > Requires: %{name}-stdlib%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
> 
> To make the main package fully "meta", there should be lines like these for
> all of the subpackages. Also, I think the libqore package is actually called
> just "libqore". At least that's how Koji built it and that's what I see in
> my local mock environment as well.

of course that is correct - done

I would like to understand what you mean with the Requires lines - currently I
have:

qore -> requires libqore, qore-stdlib
libqore -> requires nothing
qore-doc () -> requires nothing
qore-devel (C++ development package) -> requires libqore
qore-devel-doc (C++ development docs) -> requires nothing
qore-misc-tools -> requires qore (which in turn requires libqore and
qore-stdlib)

qore-devel:
The Qore library can be used without qore and the qore-stdlib packages to allow
for developing programs supporting embedded logic in them; the qore and
qore-stdlib packages are both generally useful and in the vast majority of
cases would also be used, however in a theoretical "lean" use case implementing
only embedded logic in an application where the qore standard library is not
required or needed, and external scripting support with qore is irrelevant,
they would not be installed and requiring them would just take up extra space
with no benefit.

qore-doc and qore-devel-doc:
Regarding requiring anything for the doc packages, I followed originally the
same approach as with other languages such as Python, where the doc packages
can be installed standalone as well - ex:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python3-docs/blob/master/f/python3-docs.spec
- which has no dependencies on external packaging.

> > This leads to the following error; I assume a noarch pkg should not depend 
> > on an arch-specific package:
> > > BuildError: The following noarch package built differently on different 
> > > architectures: qore-misc-tools-0.9.4.6-1.fc33.noarch.rpm
> > > rpmdiff output was:
> > > removed REQUIRES qore(armv7hl-32) = 0.9.4.6-1.fc33
> > > added   REQUIRES qore(x86-32) = 0.9.4.6-1.fc33
> 
> You're completely right. It only works for the opposite - an arch package
> depending on a noarch package. What you can do is make qore-misc-tools
> depend on only a subset of the qore subpackages - the ones it actually
> requires. I guess that would be "libqore" primarily?

The scripts in this package require the qore executable to run, and the qore
pkg in turn depends on libqore & qore-stdlib, so those other two package are
indirect dependencies through qore.  libqore is not sufficient for the
qore-misc-tools package, but needs to be in place so that the qore executable
will run.

> > %install
> > %make_install -p
> > mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{module_dir}
> > rm $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_libdir}/libqore.la
> 
> If you look closely, the last 2 paths will contain duplicate forward
> slashes. Not a big thing, but the below should be okay:
> mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{module_dir}
> rm $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir}/libqore.la

done

> > %files -n libqore
> > %{_libdir}/libqore.so.6.2.1
> > %{_libdir}/libqore.so.6
> > %license COPYING.LGPL COPYING.GPL COPYING.MIT
> > %doc README.md README-LICENSE README-MODULES RELEASE-NOTES AUTHORS ABOUT
> 
> I think the README-LICENSE file is actually a license file with extra
> commentary so it should be listed together with the other license files with
> the %license macro. Also, since qore is multi-licensed and highly modular, I
> would add README-LICENSE to the -devel and -misc-tools subpackages.

done

> > %changelog
> > [...]
> > - replaced %{_datarootdir} with ${_datadir}
> > [...]
> > - removed obsolete references to %defattr and ldconfig
> > - use %make_build instead of a hardcoded make line
> > - use %make_install -p instead of a hardcoded make install line
> 
> Minor nitpick, you should avoid using macros in %changelog records or escape
> them by repeating the macro character (for instance, %%make_build instead of
> %make_build).

oops - I knew that! - done

> > * Thu Jul 30 2020 David Nichols  0.9.4.5-1
> > - added required BuildRequires for gcc-c++
> 
> I think the dist tag on this one was supposed to be 2 (full version
> 0.9.4.5-2), right?

Yes, correct; I did not follow
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_multiple_changelog_entries_per_release
correctly.
I've updated this now so there's only one changelog entry for the 0.9.4.5-1
release.

I have updated the spec file here:
- https://docs.qore.org/srpms/qore.spec

I did not make a new SRPM or Koji build yet, as I would like to understand the
dependency issues above first.

Thank you again for your time and feedback on this!


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug 1866166] New: Review Request: R-keyring - Access the System Credential Store from R

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1866166

Bug ID: 1866166
   Summary: Review Request: R-keyring - Access the System
Credential Store from R
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: Package Review
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: quantum.anal...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Spec URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org/reviews/R-keyring/R-keyring.spec
SRPM URL:
https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org/reviews/R-keyring/R-keyring-1.1.0-1.fc31.src.rpm

Description:
Platform independent API to access the operating system's credential store.
Currently supports: Keychain on macOS, Credential Store on Windows, the Secret
Service API on Linux, and a simple, platform independent store implemented with
environment variables. Additional storage back-ends can be added easily.


Koji scratch build:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=48696442


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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 1866165] New: Review Request: R-bookdown - Authoring Books and Technical Documents with R Markdown

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1866165

Bug ID: 1866165
   Summary: Review Request: R-bookdown - Authoring Books and
Technical Documents with R Markdown
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: Package Review
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: quantum.anal...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Spec URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org/reviews/R-bookdown/R-bookdown.spec
SRPM URL:
https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org/reviews/R-bookdown/R-bookdown-0.20-1.fc31.src.rpm

Description:
Output formats and utilities for authoring books and technical documents with R
Markdown.


Koji scratch build:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=48696032


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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 1865833] Review Request: libscn - Library for replacing scanf and std::istream

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1865833

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-51f242de7f 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-2020-51f242de7f \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-51f242de7f

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 1866143] Review Request: R-RPostgres - Rcpp Interface to PostgreSQL

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1866143

Elliott Sales de Andrade  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value



--- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade  ---
koji scratch build:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=48685282


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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 1866143] New: Review Request: R-RPostgres - Rcpp Interface to PostgreSQL

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1866143

Bug ID: 1866143
   Summary: Review Request: R-RPostgres - Rcpp Interface to
PostgreSQL
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: Package Review
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: quantum.anal...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Spec URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org/reviews/R-RPostgres/R-RPostgres.spec
SRPM URL:
https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org/reviews/R-RPostgres/R-RPostgres-1.2.0-1.fc31.src.rpm

Description:
Fully DBI-compliant Rcpp-backed interface to PostgreSQL
, an open-source relational database.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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 1837107] Review Request: 7kaa - Seven Kingdoms: Ancient Adversaries (claiming ownership of package)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1837107



--- Comment #31 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-8799364879 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 stable repository.
If problem still persists, 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://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 1861216] Review Request: aml - Another Main Loop

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1861216



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-0b2fcdff6e has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-0b2fcdff6e


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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 1861216] Review Request: aml - Another Main Loop

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1861216

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |MODIFIED



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-4869a7e488 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-4869a7e488


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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 1862842] Review Request: icon - Icon programming language

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1862842



--- Comment #1 from Andy Mender  ---
Extra Koji build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=48660617

> Name:   icon
> Version:9.5.20h
> Release:1%{?dist}
> Summary:Icon programming language
> License:Public Domain

licensecheck picked up a couple of files with the NTP license:
icon-9.5.20h/src/xpm/converters/ppmtoxpm.1: NTP License
icon-9.5.20h/src/xpm/converters/ppmtoxpm.c: NTP License
icon-9.5.20h/src/xpm/converters/xpmtoppm.1: NTP License
icon-9.5.20h/src/xpm/converters/xpmtoppm.c: NTP License
icon-9.5.20h/src/xpm/doc/COPYRIGHT: NTP License

More info about the license here: https://opensource.org/licenses/NTP
It's not listed in the Fedora license cheatsheet:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main?rd=Licensing#SoftwareLicenses

The text seems similar to the BSD license.

> # libraries
> install -d -m0755 %{buildroot}%{_libdir}/%{name}
> install -p -m0644 -s bin/libcfunc.so %{buildroot}%{_libdir}/%{name}

For the main package, shouldn't this SO file be versioned?

> %files
> # rpmlint will give errors regarding some libdir/icon/*.u1 files being
> # zero-length, but that is correct.
> %license README
> %{_bindir}/icon
> %{_bindir}/icon[tx]
> %{_includedir}/icall.h

If the header is not actually needed for anything, I would remove it / remove
the install %{_includedir} lines.

The main review matrix:

Package Review
==

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


Issues:
===
- Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
  Note: icon : /usr/include/icall.h
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
  guidelines/#_devel_packages


= MUST items =

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[!]: 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.
 Review: see earlier comment
[x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
 BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

Generic:
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
 Note: Using prebuilt packages
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* Public domain", "Public
 domain", "NTP License". 962 files have unknown license. Detailed
 output of licensecheck in
 /home/amender/rpmbuild/SPECS/icon/icon/licensecheck.txt
 Review: see earlier comments
[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.
 Review: see earlier comments about licensing
[x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[!]: Development files must be in a -devel package
 Review: see earlier comment
[?]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[?]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 153600 bytes in 24 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
 Review: Yes, except for SO versioning and the lonely header file
[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.

[Bug 1862842] Review Request: icon - Icon programming language

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1862842

Andy Mender  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  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 1862842] Review Request: icon - Icon programming language

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1862842

Andy Mender  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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 1862842] Review Request: icon - Icon programming language

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1862842

Andy Mender  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||andymenderu...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|andymenderu...@gmail.com
   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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 1111691] Review Request: qore - multithreaded programming/scripting language

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691



--- Comment #43 from Andy Mender  ---
Super good job on the updates! :)

> Requires: %{name}-libqore%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
> Requires: %{name}-stdlib%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}

To make the main package fully "meta", there should be lines like these for all
of the subpackages. Also, I think the libqore package is actually called just
"libqore". At least that's how Koji built it and that's what I see in my local
mock environment as well.

> This leads to the following error; I assume a noarch pkg should not depend on 
> an arch-specific package:
> > BuildError: The following noarch package built differently on different 
> > architectures: qore-misc-tools-0.9.4.6-1.fc33.noarch.rpm
> > rpmdiff output was:
> > removed REQUIRES qore(armv7hl-32) = 0.9.4.6-1.fc33
> > added   REQUIRES qore(x86-32) = 0.9.4.6-1.fc33

You're completely right. It only works for the opposite - an arch package
depending on a noarch package. What you can do is make qore-misc-tools depend
on only a subset of the qore subpackages - the ones it actually requires. I
guess that would be "libqore" primarily?

> %install
> %make_install -p
> mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{module_dir}
> rm $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_libdir}/libqore.la

If you look closely, the last 2 paths will contain duplicate forward slashes.
Not a big thing, but the below should be okay:
mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{module_dir}
rm $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir}/libqore.la

> %files -n libqore
> %{_libdir}/libqore.so.6.2.1
> %{_libdir}/libqore.so.6
> %license COPYING.LGPL COPYING.GPL COPYING.MIT
> %doc README.md README-LICENSE README-MODULES RELEASE-NOTES AUTHORS ABOUT

I think the README-LICENSE file is actually a license file with extra
commentary so it should be listed together with the other license files with
the %license macro. Also, since qore is multi-licensed and highly modular, I
would add README-LICENSE to the -devel and -misc-tools subpackages.

> %changelog
> [...]
> - replaced %{_datarootdir} with ${_datadir}
> [...]
> - removed obsolete references to %defattr and ldconfig
> - use %make_build instead of a hardcoded make line
> - use %make_install -p instead of a hardcoded make install line

Minor nitpick, you should avoid using macros in %changelog records or escape
them by repeating the macro character (for instance, %%make_build instead of
%make_build).

> * Thu Jul 30 2020 David Nichols  0.9.4.5-1
> - added required BuildRequires for gcc-c++

I think the dist tag on this one was supposed to be 2 (full version 0.9.4.5-2),
right?


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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 1376511] Review Request: nexus - NeXus scientific data file format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376511



--- Comment #21 from Andy Mender  ---
Nice! 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 1376511] Review Request: nexus - NeXus scientific data file format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376511

Andy Mender  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 1866044] New: Review Request: bpytop - Linux/OSX/FreeBSD resource monitor

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1866044

Bug ID: 1866044
   Summary: Review Request: bpytop - Linux/OSX/FreeBSD resource
monitor
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: Package Review
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: ego.corda...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Spec URL: https://atim.fedorapeople.org//bpytop.spec
SRPM URL: https://atim.fedorapeople.org//bpytop-1.0.2-1.fc32.src.rpm

Description:
Resource monitor that shows usage and stats for processor, memory, disks,
network and processes.

Python port of bashtop.

Features:

- Easy to use, with a game inspired menu system.
- Full mouse support, all buttons with a highlighted key is clickable and mouse
  scroll works in process list and menu boxes.
- Fast and responsive UI with UP, DOWN keys process selection.
- Function for showing detailed stats for selected process.
- Ability to filter processes, multiple filters can be entered.
- Easy switching between sorting options.
- Send SIGTERM, SIGKILL, SIGINT to selected process.
- UI menu for changing all config file options.
- Auto scaling graph for network usage.
- Shows message in menu if new version is available
- Shows current read and write speeds for disks


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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 1811183] Review Request: golang-github-aliyun-cli - Alibaba Cloud (Aliyun) CLI

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1811183
Bug 1811183 depends on bug 1862861, which changed state.

Bug 1862861 Summary: Review Request: golang-github-shulhan-bindata - A small 
utility which generates Go code from any file
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1862861

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
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 1862861] Review Request: golang-github-shulhan-bindata - A small utility which generates Go code from any file

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1862861

Brandon Perkins  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2020-08-04 14:16:29



--- Comment #7 from Brandon Perkins  ---
CLOSED. In Rawhide (f33).


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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 1862460] Review Request: python-cachelib - A collection of cache libraries with a common API

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1862460

Matej Grabovsky  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2020-08-04 14:09:20



--- Comment #5 from Matej Grabovsky  ---
Now available in Rawhide.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
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 1865833] Review Request: libscn - Library for replacing scanf and std::istream

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1865833

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|MODIFIED



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2020-51f242de7f has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-51f242de7f


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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 1865833] Review Request: libscn - Library for replacing scanf and std::istream

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1865833



--- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libscn


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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 1862460] Review Request: python-cachelib - A collection of cache libraries with a common API

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1862460



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


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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 1861216] Review Request: aml - Another Main Loop

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1861216



--- Comment #5 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/aml


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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 1862861] Review Request: golang-github-shulhan-bindata - A small utility which generates Go code from any file

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1862861



--- Comment #6 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/golang-github-shulhan-bindata


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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 1838027] Review Request: zuul - Trunk Gating System

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1838027
Bug 1838027 depends on bug 1801001, which changed state.

Bug 1801001 Summary: python-cheroot-8.4.2 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1801001

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
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 1865833] Review Request: libscn - Library for replacing scanf and std::istream

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1865833

Artem  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
 CC||ego.corda...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ego.corda...@gmail.com
   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #1 from Artem  ---
Package approved.

---

Package Review
==

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



= MUST items =

C/C++:
[x]: Provides: bundled(gnulib) in place as required.
 Note: Sources not installed
[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]: 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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla
 upstream sources. No licenses found. Please check the source files for
 licenses manually.
[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.
[x]: 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.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
 license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
 license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: 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:
[x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
 file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not 

[Bug 1859891] Review Request: python2-dns - DNS toolkit for Python

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1859891

Lumír Balhar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2020-08-04 11:38:49



--- Comment #10 from Lumír Balhar  ---
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-0895e64716


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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 1826439] Review Request: libvma - LD_PRELOAD-able library with standard BSD sockets API

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1826439



--- Comment #31 from igor.ivanov...@gmail.com ---
Thank you


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://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 1826439] Review Request: libvma - LD_PRELOAD-able library with standard BSD sockets API

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1826439



--- Comment #30 from Michal Schmidt  ---
Igor,
I can see no more blocking issues. Thanks!
I have added you to the "packager" Fedora group.
You can reopen https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9509 now.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://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 1865833] New: Review Request: libscn - Library for replacing scanf and std::istream

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1865833

Bug ID: 1865833
   Summary: Review Request: libscn - Library for replacing scanf
and std::istream
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
  Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: vit...@easycoding.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Spec URL: https://github.com/EasyCoding/libscn/raw/master/libscn.spec
SRPM URL: https://xvitaly.fedorapeople.org/for-review/libscn-0.3-1.fc32.src.rpm
Description: Library for replacing scanf and std::istream
Fedora Account System Username: xvitaly


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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 1185662] Review Request: shadowd - Shadow Daemon web application firewall server

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1185662

Hendrik Buchwald  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?(h...@zecure.org)|needinfo-




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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

needinfo denied: [Bug 1185662] Review Request: shadowd - Shadow Daemon web application firewall server

[bugzilla]

Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: Package Review

Hendrik Buchwald  has denied Package Review
's request for Hendrik Buchwald
's needinfo:
Bug 1185662: Review Request: shadowd - Shadow Daemon web application firewall
server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1185662
___
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 1801580] Review Request: openjfx-11 - Rich client application platform for Java

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1801580

Nicolas De Amicis  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2020-08-04 07:34:54



--- Comment #25 from Nicolas De Amicis  ---
as discussed, openjfx8 for javafx8 and openjfx for javafx11 are in rawhide


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
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 1809405] Review Request: python-sumatra - Tool for managing and tracking projects based on numerical simulation and/or analysis, with the aim of supporting reproducible research

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1809405



--- Comment #20 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD)  ---
Hey,

No worries, please take your time.

Unfortunately, meetings are harder to do. Could you ask your queries here in
the review ticket? (That's a perfectly normal + fine thing to do)

Cheers,
Ankur


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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 1857199] Review Request: mozjs78 - JavaScript interpreter and libraries

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1857199

František Zatloukal  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2020-08-04 06:05:13




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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 1809405] Review Request: python-sumatra - Tool for managing and tracking projects based on numerical simulation and/or analysis, with the aim of supporting reproducible research

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1809405

Ntish  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?(nisharma@redhat.c |
   |om) |



--- Comment #19 from Ntish  ---
Hey Ankur,

Apologies, i got little busy and thie got out of my bucket somehow. I will pick
it up over weekend, Additionally, Can we have meeting for it over the weekend?

Regards
Nitish


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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