[Bug 1507985] Review Request: libfilteraudio - Lightweight audio filtering library made from webrtc code

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1507985

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2017-12-19 14:44:44



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
libfilteraudio-0.0.1-2.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 stable repository.
If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

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

[Bug 1507985] Review Request: libfilteraudio - Lightweight audio filtering library made from webrtc code

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1507985

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
libfilteraudio-0.0.1-2.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-9ee64c97fd

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

[Bug 1507985] Review Request: libfilteraudio - Lightweight audio filtering library made from webrtc code

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1507985

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|MODIFIED



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

[Bug 1507985] Review Request: libfilteraudio - Lightweight audio filtering library made from webrtc code

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1507985



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
libfilteraudio-0.0.1-2.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-9ee64c97fd

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

[Bug 1507985] Review Request: libfilteraudio - Lightweight audio filtering library made from webrtc code

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1507985



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

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

[Bug 1507985] Review Request: libfilteraudio - Lightweight audio filtering library made from webrtc code

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1507985

Sandro Mani  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|POST
  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #4 from Sandro Mani  ---
You should ask upstream to include a separate license file, but this is
non-blocking.

Package approved.


Package Review
==

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


Issues:
===
= MUST items =

C/C++:
[ ]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[ ]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[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.
[-]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
 license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
 license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "BSD (3 clause)", "Unknown or generated". 88 files have unknown
 license.
[-]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[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.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
 provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
 %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[!]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
 file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
 translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
 architectures.
[-]: %check is present 

[Bug 1507985] Review Request: libfilteraudio - Lightweight audio filtering library made from webrtc code

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1507985



--- Comment #3 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
Spec URL:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/eclipseo/packaging/8392830/libfilteraudio.spec
SRPM URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/eclipseo/tox/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00656736-libfilteraudio/libfilteraudio-0.0.1-2.fc28.src.rpm

 - Added export LDFLAGS=%{__global_ldflags}

 - Added space to %changelog

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

[Bug 1507985] Review Request: libfilteraudio - Lightweight audio filtering library made from webrtc code

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1507985



--- Comment #2 from Sandro Mani  ---
As a general remark, I'm not sure whether the changelog format requires an
empty line between each entry, but I'd personally recommend it because it
greatly increases readability. I'll leave up to you though.

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

[Bug 1507985] Review Request: libfilteraudio - Lightweight audio filtering library made from webrtc code

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1507985



--- Comment #1 from Sandro Mani  ---
You should also

export LDFLAGS=%{__global_ldflags}

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

[Bug 1507985] Review Request: libfilteraudio - Lightweight audio filtering library made from webrtc code

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1507985

Sandro Mani  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

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



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

[Bug 1507985] Review Request: libfilteraudio - Lightweight audio filtering library made from webrtc code

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1507985

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1508002




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1508002
[Bug 1508002] Review Request: uTox - The lightweight Tox client
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org