[Bug 484597] Review Request: python-argparse - Optparse inspired command line parser for Python

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484597


Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+




--- Comment #2 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi  2009-02-10 03:02:52 
EDT ---
Nevermind, the package itself uses setuptools and thus the above is not
necessary.

However, you might be missing one %install line; according to the Python
packaging guidelines (PPG)

If your module is using distutils or setuptools, use the following commands
during %install:

%{__python} setup.py install --skip-build --root $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
%{__python} setup.py install -O1 --skip-build --root $RPM_BUILD_ROOT

On the other hand, the package builds the .pyc and .pyo files with the one
command you have. Maybe you can enlighten me about the effect of the -O1
switch?

Suggestions:

- Drop BR on python devel and change BR from python-setuptools to
python-setuptools-devel as in PPG.

- Change %SOURCE0 line to use %{version} (and maybe %{oname} also?).

- Add a line break before %description and delete the one after it to improve
legibility.



Package adheres to Packaging Review Guidelines.

APPROVED

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484591] Review Request: muse - Midi/Audio Music Sequencer

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484591


Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||hdego...@redhat.com




--- Comment #2 from Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com  2009-02-10 03:08:09 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #0)
 This Review Request have been opened before (bug #483301) but someone with
 personality issues have closed that bug. Let us hope he doesn't taint this 
 one.

Orcan, I appreciate your Fedora work, and I can understand that you have issues
with a certain person. But you *MUST* stop offending other Fedora contributors.
Stop writing: please do not post in my bugs and certainly don't accuse other
contributors of personality issues. You may disagree on technical grounds
with Ralf and so do others of us from time to time. But *YOUR* behaviour here
is completely unacceptable, you need to *STOP* this immediately!

There is a huge difference between discussing about technical issues and
sometimes being rather stubborn about them (Ralf) and between anti-social
behaviour. it is *YOU* who is way out of line here not Ralf.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484591] Review Request: muse - Midi/Audio Music Sequencer

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484591





--- Comment #3 from Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com  2009-02-10 03:14:23 
EDT ---
With that said, and hopefully made very clear! I would like to review this
package as I think it is great that someone is working on moving packages from
planetccrma into Fedora proper.

The Epoch is fine, but with the other 2 issues I have to side with Ralf, using
AutoProv: no is not acceptable, your package will miss essential requires and
adding them manually is error prone and will break when the soname's of
libraries you use change (and you do a rebuild). The correct solution here is
to use filtering of the generated provides as explained in the previous review
request.

Also the warnings are serious and need fixing, Ralf has already explained how
(replace %d with %zd), let me know if there are other warnings which you
need help fixing.

Can you please do a new revision with these 2 issues fixed? then I'll do a full
review.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484735] Review Request: fipscheck - A library for integrity verification of FIPS validated modules

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484735


Marcela Maslanova mmasl...@redhat.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-review?




--- Comment #1 from Marcela Maslanova mmasl...@redhat.com  2009-02-10 
03:28:19 EDT ---
OK source files match upstream: 6626b490c5b62a796e6272126e4ff6e8
OK package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
OK specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
OK dist tag is present.
OK build root is correct.
OK license field matches the actual license.
OK license is open source-compatible. License text not included upstream.
OK latest version is being packaged.
OK BuildRequires are proper.
OK %clean is present.
OK package builds in mock (Rawhide/x86_64).
OK debuginfo package is need and ok.
OK rpmlint is silent.
fipscheck-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
- The devel package don't have to contain documentation.
OK final provides and requires look sane.
OK no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths.
OK owns the directories it creates.
OK no duplicates in %files.
OK file permissions are appropriate.
OK no scriptlets present.
OK documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
OK %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
OK no headers.
OK no pkgconfig files.
OK no libtool .la droppings.

The script ltmain.sh is under GPLv2+ but you are not installing this file, so
the licence is ok as is.

Could you please explain the line below? Couldn't you change automake to
install it in right place?
mv $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir}/libfipscheck.so.* $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_lib}

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484735] Review Request: fipscheck - A library for integrity verification of FIPS validated modules

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484735





--- Comment #2 from Tomas Mraz tm...@redhat.com  2009-02-10 03:32:45 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #1)
 The script ltmain.sh is under GPLv2+ but you are not installing this file, so
 the licence is ok as is.

Of course.

 Could you please explain the line below? Couldn't you change automake to
 install it in right place?
 mv $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir}/libfipscheck.so.* $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_lib}
I could probably use --libdir in %configure, but I'd have to move the devel .so
symlink to _libdir then so I don't think it make much sense to do that. This
library is very small and it can be potential dependency of binaries which will
reside in /sbin so I have to put it in /%{_lib}.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484591] Review Request: muse - Midi/Audio Music Sequencer

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484591





--- Comment #4 from Kevin Kofler ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org  2009-02-10 03:42:02 
EDT ---
Oops, the solution I provided for filtering is faulty, see:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484837

%{__sed} '/\.so$/d' needs to be: %{__sed} '/\.so\(()(64bit)\)\?$/d'

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484735] Review Request: fipscheck - A library for integrity verification of FIPS validated modules

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484735


Marcela Maslanova mmasl...@redhat.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+




--- Comment #3 from Marcela Maslanova mmasl...@redhat.com  2009-02-10 
03:47:23 EDT ---
ACCEPT

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484591] Review Request: muse - Midi/Audio Music Sequencer

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484591


Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp




--- Comment #5 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp  2009-02-10 
03:54:18 EDT ---
(Note that I mailed to Orcan privately...)

(In reply to comment #3)
 The correct solution here is
 to use filtering of the generated provides as explained in the previous review
 request.
- As Kevin said in the comment 4 (and as I reported on the bug
  484837), the filtering method proposed on the previous review request
  is not correct on x86_64


(In reply to comment #4)
 Oops, the solution I provided for filtering is faulty, see:
 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484837
 
 %{__sed} '/\.so$/d' needs to be: %{__sed} '/\.so\(()(64bit)\)\?$/d'
- This time it is not correct on i386.

 Also the warnings are serious and need fixing, Ralf has already explained how
 (replace %d with %zd), let me know if there are other warnings which you
 need help fixing.

- Would you explain why you particularly mention these warnings?
  These warnings all comes from (f)printf with passing incorrect format,
  however I have already seen in other review requests that
  many warnings which seemed more and more critical than this
  (like one related to implicit function declaration you mentioned
   before) were just ignored.
  Of course I admit that fixing these warnings are desirable, however
  I am against making these warning the blocker for this review
  request.
  If you surely think these warnings are blockers, would you propose
  fedora-packaging-list about what warnings should be treated as
  review blockers? 
  It is really appreciated because I had repeatedly been asked
  is it a blocker??

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484591] Review Request: muse - Midi/Audio Music Sequencer

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484591





--- Comment #6 from Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com  2009-02-10 04:06:34 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #5)
  Also the warnings are serious and need fixing, Ralf has already explained 
  how
  (replace %d with %zd), let me know if there are other warnings which you
  need help fixing.
 
 - Would you explain why you particularly mention these warnings?
   These warnings all comes from (f)printf with passing incorrect format,
   however I have already seen in other review requests that
   many warnings which seemed more and more critical than this
   (like one related to implicit function declaration you mentioned
before) were just ignored.
   Of course I admit that fixing these warnings are desirable, however
   I am against making these warning the blocker for this review
   request.
   If you surely think these warnings are blockers, would you propose
   fedora-packaging-list about what warnings should be treated as
   review blockers? 
   It is really appreciated because I had repeatedly been asked
   is it a blocker??

As Ralf has demonstrated these warnings are usually a real issue, which only
shows on 64 bit systems. But usually these are in debug printf's and thus quite
often people don't care about fixing them. I agree this is not something which
we normally block reviews on. So I wont do that in this case either. Still this
something which really should be fixed, so consider this a should fix item.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484386] Review Request: gri - A language for scientific illustration

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484386





--- Comment #3 from D Haley my...@yahoo.com  2009-02-10 04:06:40 EDT ---
SPEC URL: http://dhd.selfip.com/427e/gri-2.spec
SRPM URL: http://dhd.selfip.com/427e/gri-2.12.18-2.src.rpm 

rpmlint output:
$ rpmlint ../SRPMS/gri-2.12.18-2.fc10.src.rpm
../RPMS/i386/gri-2.12.18-2.fc10.i386.rpm  gri.spec 
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.


Koji Build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1116786

Changelog:
* Tue Feb 10 2009 D Haley  my...@yahoo.com 2.12.18-2
- Cleared many old changelog entries by D, Kelly  T Powers (year=2005)
- Drop readline buildreq.
- Fix lic. GPLv2 to GPLv2+
- Create emacs subpackages
- Fix release line to include dist macro



License is GPLv2+, not GPLv2.
Done.

Remove Requires: readline, this is automatically picked up.
Done.

Remove pushd and popd from setup, you don't need them.
Done.

Change make command to
make %{?_smp_mflags}
as this works fine. The paths are already set by %configure.
Done.

Replace rm -Rf with rm -rf to be consistent.
Done.

Absolute paths in %files need to be replaced with %{_bindir}, %{_datadir} and
so on.
Whoops. Fixed.

Changelog is way too long, IMHO you may remove everything that is before
2006.
I removed all but the last entry before myself, just to make it clear that this
is based upon someone else's work.

You'll have to branch the emacs script in its own subpackage, as gri probably
works without it.
Created subpackages emacs-%{name} and emacs-%{name}-el. I am not an emacs user,
(brought up on vi(m)) so this is based upon reading refs [1-3]. So there may be
a mistake in my understanding here.

[1] http://chitlesh.fedorapeople.org/RPMS/dinotrace.spec
[2] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Emacs 
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emacs_lisp#Source_code

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484386] Review Request: gri - A language for scientific illustration

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484386





--- Comment #4 from D Haley my...@yahoo.com  2009-02-10 04:09:21 EDT ---
Correct SRPM url:
SRPM URL: http://dhd.selfip.com/427e/gri-2.12.18-2.fc10.src.rpm 

(The other one now links to the same file, but has the wrong name).

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484735] Review Request: fipscheck - A library for integrity verification of FIPS validated modules

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484735


Tomas Mraz tm...@redhat.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-cvs?




--- Comment #4 from Tomas Mraz tm...@redhat.com  2009-02-10 04:13:49 EDT ---
New Package CVS Request
===
Package Name: fipscheck
Short Description: A library for integrity verification of FIPS validated
modules
Owners: tmraz
Branches:
InitialCC:

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 483205] Review Request: eclipse-systemtapgui - GUI interface for SystemTap

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483205





--- Comment #24 from Anithra anit...@linux.vnet.ibm.com  2009-02-10 04:25:58 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #23)
 X BuildRequires are proper
  - do we need a BR/R on SystemTap itself?  What about kernel-devel?
We wont need it as this can run on machines without systemtap(even on
windows.). The probes and functions wont be listed in the IDE but apart from
that it should work fine as the script is sent to the server for execution.
 X make sure lines are = 80 characters
  - please wrap line 29 (the pdebuild call) with '\' characters
done.
 ? macros fine
  - it would be nice if you s/$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{buildroot}/ but it's not the
end of the world
done.

SPEC URL:
http://nchc.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/stapgui/eclipse-systemtapgui.spec
SRPM URL:
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/stapgui/eclipse-systemtapgui-1.0-5.fc11.src.rpm

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484591] Review Request: muse - Midi/Audio Music Sequencer

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484591





--- Comment #7 from Kevin Kofler ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org  2009-02-10 04:27:36 
EDT ---
  %{__sed} '/\.so$/d' needs to be: %{__sed} '/\.so\(()(64bit)\)\?$/d'
 - This time it is not correct on i386.

It is, see bug 484837.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 225744] Merge Review: fbset

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225744





--- Comment #5 from Zdenek Prikryl zprik...@redhat.com  2009-02-10 04:29:42 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #4)
 There is something in the guidelines about %makeinstall:
 
 http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Why_the_.25makeinstall_macro_should_not_be_used
 

Since make install DESTDIR=%{buildroot} doesn't work and fbset doesn't use
libtool or autotools stuff, I'd not remove the %makeinstall macro.

 And I have seen this:
 
 MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
 architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
 ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
 bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work 
 on
 that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
 corresponding ExcludeArch line.
 

I created the bug and write ID to the spec file. Check cvs.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484591] Review Request: muse - Midi/Audio Music Sequencer

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484591


Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||rc040...@freenet.de




--- Comment #8 from Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de  2009-02-10 04:50:19 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #6)

 As Ralf has demonstrated these warnings are usually a real issue, which only
 shows on 64 bit systems. But usually these are in debug printf's and thus 
 quite
 often people don't care about fixing them. I agree this is not something which
 we normally block reviews on. So I wont do that in this case either. Still 
 this
 something which really should be fixed, so consider this a should fix item.

That's why I had labeled it SHOULD.

It's a classic of the 32bit-64bit portability problems.

It is broken code which is guaranteed to be non-functional under certain
conditions. The only question is when this bug will hit, not if this will this
will hit.

Due to the nature of size_t, such kind of bugs show when some variable will
exceed sizeof(int) (4GB) or when some computations will be performed on
size_t's.

The former will usually only cause visible problems in big use-cases, while
the later usually shows as corrupt output.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484591] Review Request: muse - Midi/Audio Music Sequencer

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484591





--- Comment #9 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp  2009-02-10 
04:52:30 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #7)
   %{__sed} '/\.so$/d' needs to be: %{__sed} '/\.so\(()(64bit)\)\?$/d'
  - This time it is not correct on i386.
 
 It is, see bug 484837.

Yes, I missed the question mark.

By the way this package does no build on dist-f11 (koji)
One issue is g++44 issue, however there is another.
configure says:
---
checking for DocBook V4.1... 
no
configure: WARNING: DocBook 4.1 DTD not found or not usable - documentation
will not be built
---
config.log says:
---
configure:19341: checking for DocBook V4.1
onsgmls:/usr/share/sgml/docbook/xml-dtd-4.1.2-1.0-42.fc11/ent/iso-amsa.ent:8:19:E:
X21B6 is not a function name
onsgmls:/usr/share/sgml/docbook/xml-dtd-4.1.2-1.0-42.fc11/ent/iso-amsa.ent:9:19:E:
X21B7 is not a function name
onsgmls:/usr/share/sgml/docbook/xml-dtd-4.1.2-1.0-42.fc11/ent/iso-amsa.ent:10:17:E:
X21D3 is not a function name
onsgmls:/usr/share/sgml/docbook/xml-dtd-4.1.2-1.0-42.fc11/ent/iso-amsa.ent:11:18:E:
X21CA is not a function name
onsgmls:/usr/share/sgml/docbook/xml-dtd-4.1.2-1.0-42.fc11/ent/iso-amsa.ent:12:18:E:
X21C3 is not a function name
onsgmls:/usr/share/sgml/docbook/xml-dtd-4.1.2-1.0-42.fc11/ent/iso-amsa.ent:13:18:E:
X21C2 is not a function name
onsgmls:/usr/share/sgml/docbook/xml-dtd-4.1.2-1.0-42.fc11/ent/iso-amsa.ent:14:18:E:
X21DA is not a function name
onsgmls:/usr/share/sgml/docbook/xml-dtd-4.1.2-1.0-42.fc11/ent/iso-amsa.ent:15:17:E:
X219E is not a function name
onsgmls:/usr/share/sgml/docbook/xml-dtd-4.1.2-1.0-42.fc11/ent/iso-amsa.ent:16:18:E:
X21C7 is not a function name


-
I am not sure what is causing this, because
- with dist-f10-updates-candidate, checking for DocBook V4.1...
  returns yes
- My local build passes this point

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 225744] Merge Review: fbset

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225744


Adrian Reber adr...@lisas.de changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution||NEXTRELEASE
   Flag|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+




--- Comment #6 from Adrian Reber adr...@lisas.de  2009-02-10 04:58:20 EDT ---
I am just mentioning the ExcludeArch bug here:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484843

Rest looks good.

Source matches upstream.
Patches look good.

I am not 100% happy with the %makeinstall, but it seems that it creates no
problems in this case. So:

APPROVED.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 449207] Review Request: notify-sharp - A C# implementation for Desktop Notifications

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=449207


Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||fab...@bernewireless.net
   Flag|fedora-review?  |




--- Comment #8 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net  2009-02-10 
05:02:05 EDT ---
Reset review flag

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 466649] Review Request: adeona-0.2.1 - Stolen Laptop Tracker

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=466649


Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||fab...@bernewireless.net
   Flag|fedora-review?  |




-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 483543] Review Request: systemtapguiserver

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483543





--- Comment #8 from Anithra anit...@linux.vnet.ibm.com  2009-02-10 05:20:36 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #7)
 I don't think it's a good idea to have
 
 INSTALL_DIR = /usr/sbin/stapgui-server
 
 hard-coded in the makefile.  Do it in the specfile instead.
This was actually redundant,  removed it from the makefile. 

Spec URL:
http://nchc.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/stapgui/systemtapguiserver.spec
SRPM URL:
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/stapgui/systemtapguiserver-1.0-4.src.rpm

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 483543] Review Request: systemtapguiserver

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483543


Anithra anit...@linux.vnet.ibm.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Depends on||483205




-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 483205] Review Request: eclipse-systemtapgui - GUI interface for SystemTap

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483205


Anithra anit...@linux.vnet.ibm.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks|177841  |483543




-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 483205] Review Request: eclipse-systemtapgui - GUI interface for SystemTap

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483205





--- Comment #25 from Anithra anit...@linux.vnet.ibm.com  2009-02-10 05:26:49 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #22)
 (In reply to comment #20)
  (In reply to comment #19)
   Anithra:  on the website there is a screenshot showing graphing.  Is that
   functionality included here?  Does it use Draw2D, GEF, BIRT, or something 
   else?
  
  graphing functionality is included, it uses eclipse-swt
 
 Okay, I wouldn't have guessed that, but cool :)

:). Planning to replace with something more sophisticated in the next release.
Will discuss this by mail

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 480857] Review Request: pdumpfs - Daily backup system

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480857


Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|fab...@bernewireless.net
   Flag||fedora-review?




-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 468579] Review Request: PyQuante - Python Quantum Chemistry

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468579


Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|fab...@bernewireless.net
   Flag||fedora-review?




-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484229] Review Request: qbittorrent - A bittorrent Client

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484229





--- Comment #31 from leigh scott leigh123li...@googlemail.com  2009-02-10 
06:01:38 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #30)
 Oops reread that and yep. You're quite right. Sorry Leigh.
 
 Anyway... I think things are OK... So you get a passing grade of fedora-review
 + :).


Hi Eli,

Thanks for reviewing qbittorrent.


Leigh

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 463767] Review Request: cloog - The Chunky Loop Generator

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463767





--- Comment #22 from Dodji Seketeli do...@redhat.com  2009-02-10 05:57:12 EDT 
---
Upstream accepted the patches.They should properly appear in the upstream git
soon.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 483250] Review Request: chordii - Print songbooks (lyrics + chords)

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483250





--- Comment #7 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net  2009-02-10 
06:00:37 EDT ---
I will make a full review soon but I can't sponsor you.  You should make some
informal reviews and/or submit more packages and add a note here ti find a
sponsor.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 463767] Review Request: cloog - The Chunky Loop Generator

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463767





--- Comment #23 from Dodji Seketeli do...@redhat.com  2009-02-10 06:35:36 EDT 
---
Hey Mamoru,

I am thinking that maybe I should change the name of the package from cloog to
cloog-ppl, as this branch of the package is really intended to be compiled with
the ppl backend only.

When compiled with say the polylib backend, it becomes another library as
include/cloog/polylib_backend.h is then included by cloog.h and induces a new
API.
In that case a new package cloog-polylib would then be generated.

Also, cloog-ppl (that is at http://repo.or.cz/w/cloog-ppl.git) really is a
special branch of the cloog tree (that is at http://repo.or.cz/w/cloog.git)
where the ppl backend branch work is happening. It will be later merged back
into the cloog main tree, after gcc 4.4 is released. So gcc 4.4 will be based
on cloog-ppl, whereas gcc 4.5 is likely to be based on cloog, after cloog-ppl
is merged back into the main tree.

What do you think about this ?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484042] Review Request: vlgothic-fonts - Japanese TrueType fonts

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484042


Akira TAGOH ta...@redhat.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution||NEXTRELEASE




--- Comment #4 from Akira TAGOH ta...@redhat.com  2009-02-10 07:11:14 EDT ---
Thanks. packages has been built.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 463767] Review Request: cloog - The Chunky Loop Generator

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463767





--- Comment #24 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp  2009-02-10 
07:35:33 EDT ---
Well, do you want to resubmit a new review request for ppl
once cloog-ppl is merged to ppl main tree? When the srpm name is
to be renamed, we have to submit another review request for it.

If not, I think the less troublesome way is to create
cloog-ppl(-devel) binary rpms from ppl srpm.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 463767] Review Request: cloog - The Chunky Loop Generator

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463767





--- Comment #25 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp  2009-02-10 
07:41:23 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #24)
 If not, I think the less troublesome way is to create
 cloog-ppl(-devel) binary rpms from ppl srpm.

Of course from cloog srpm, sorry...

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 454220] Review Request: germanium - a download manager for eMusic.com

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454220


Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution||NOTABUG
   Flag|fedora-review?  |




--- Comment #52 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp  2009-02-10 
07:51:59 EDT ---
Thank you for reply.
So, when you have some time to work on this software again,
please feel free to submit a new review request and mark this bug
a duplicate of the new one. Anyway I appreciate your work.

Once closing now.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484808] Review Request: python-linux-procfs - parser classes for information found in /proc

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484808





--- Comment #2 from Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo a...@redhat.com  2009-02-10 
08:03:16 EDT ---
1) Because procfs also exists in other OSes, such as Solaris, where this idea,
AFAIK, came from. And the files parsed have very much Linux specific keys and
formats, so having linux in the name is needed.

2) All the .py files state that the files are under GPLv2, as does the specfile
License tag. Is it really a requirement that even with this clearly stated we
need a copy of the license in a LICENSE named file?

If that is the case, sure, I can do it, and will as well as to submit a patch
for rpmlint to warn about that :-)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 458440] Review Request: bluemindo - Simple audio player in python/GTK

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458440


Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||needinfo?(louizat...@gmail.
   ||com)




--- Comment #11 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net  2009-02-10 
08:45:25 EDT ---
Do you need any more help to bring this into Fedora?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484808] Review Request: python-linux-procfs - parser classes for information found in /proc

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484808





--- Comment #3 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com  2009-02-10 09:13:56 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #2)
 1) Because procfs also exists in other OSes, such as Solaris, where this idea,
 AFAIK, came from. And the files parsed have very much Linux specific keys and
 formats, so having linux in the name is needed.
 
That is ok then.

 2) All the .py files state that the files are under GPLv2, as does the 
 specfile
 License tag. Is it really a requirement that even with this clearly stated we
 need a copy of the license in a LICENSE named file?
 
 If that is the case, sure, I can do it, and will as well as to submit a patch
 for rpmlint to warn about that :-)

SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. 

I will say that either you can add license text as header in all .py files or
include separate license text file.
see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text

you can then include license file as %doc


3) F6 is already EOL and since F7 we have python = 2.5 so you can change 

%if %{python_ver} = 2.5
%{python_sitelib}/*.egg-info
%endif
to
%{python_sitelib}/*.egg-info
only

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 477870] Review Request: eclipse-emf - Eclipse Modeling Framework (EMF) Eclipse plugin

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477870


Mat Booth fed...@matbooth.co.uk changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution||NEXTRELEASE




--- Comment #21 from Mat Booth fed...@matbooth.co.uk  2009-02-10 09:20:07 EDT 
---
Built successfully for all requested branches, closing.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484676] Review Request: eclipse-dtp - Eclipse Data Tools Platform

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484676


Bug 484676 depends on bug 477870, which changed state.

Bug 477870 Summary: Review Request: eclipse-emf - Eclipse Modeling Framework 
(EMF) Eclipse plugin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477870

   What|Old Value   |New Value

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution||NEXTRELEASE



-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 457304] Review Request: gestikk - Mouse gestures for you to easily control your PC

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457304





--- Comment #3 from Nicoleau Fabien nicoleau.fab...@gmail.com  2009-02-10 
09:33:47 EDT ---
Hi,
Thank you for taking this review. 
I'll contact upstream and update the review ASAP.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 225639] Merge Review: cdrdao

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225639


Jörg Schilling joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||joerg.schill...@fokus.fraun
   ||hofer.de




--- Comment #11 from Jörg Schilling joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de  
2009-02-10 09:33:59 EDT ---
Cdrdao is no longer actively maintained (the last feature
enhancement was 3 years ago).


Cdrdao uses an extremely old libscg variant and if you care about
cdrdao, this libscg needs to be updated with recent original
software from:

ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/cdrecord/alpha/

Note that you cannot use the library from cdrtools fork distributed 
by readhat as this fork is in conflict with GPL and Copyright and cannot 
be legally distributed. The original software however has been approved
by Sun legal as free software without known legal problems.

BTW: Another reason for not using the fork is that the fork is not
actively maintained since nearly two years and as the fork is full 
of well documented bugs.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484476] Review Request: telepathy-farsight - Telepathy client to handle media streaming channels

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484476





--- Comment #3 from Brian Pepple bdpep...@gmail.com  2009-02-10 10:09:22 EDT 
---
Oops, forgot to mention that I haven't had a chance to talk to upstream about
the rpath issue.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 480538] Review Request: iptux -- a tool for sharing and transporting files and directories in Lan

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480538





--- Comment #13 from Liang Suilong liangsuil...@gmail.com  2009-02-10 
10:09:10 EDT ---
Now I have updated the specfile. Here is the URL:
http://liangsuilong.fedorapeople.org/iptux.spec

Here is SRPM
url：http://liangsuilong.fedorapeople.org/iptux-0.4.4-1.fc10.src.rpm

I hope someone can help me.

Kaio，could you help me again？

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484476] Review Request: telepathy-farsight - Telepathy client to handle media streaming channels

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484476





--- Comment #2 from Brian Pepple bdpep...@gmail.com  2009-02-10 10:08:25 EDT 
---
Spec URL: http://bpepple.fedorapeople.org/rpms/telepathy-farsight.spec
SRPM URL:
http://bpepple.fedorapeople.org/rpms/telepathy-farsight-0.0.4-1.fc10.src.rpm

* Tue Feb 10 2009 Brian Pepple bpep...@fedoraproject.org - 0.0.4-2
- Add devel requires on telepathy-filesystem.

Koji build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1117361

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484476] Review Request: telepathy-farsight - Telepathy client to handle media streaming channels

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484476


Jeremy Katz ka...@redhat.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-review+




--- Comment #4 from Jeremy Katz ka...@redhat.com  2009-02-10 10:14:43 EDT ---
Probably worth doing, but certainly not a blocker for getting it in given the
workaround present.  Approved.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 483390] Review Request: perl-Schedule-Cron-Events - Take a line from a crontab and find out when events will occur

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483390


Robert Scheck red...@linuxnetz.de changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-cvs?




--- Comment #12 from Robert Scheck red...@linuxnetz.de  2009-02-10 10:12:39 
EDT ---
New Package CVS Request
===
Package Name: perl-Schedule-Cron-Events
Short Description: Take a line from a crontab and find out when events will
occur
Owners: robert
Branches: EL-4 EL-5 F-9 F-10


I'll make a modified tarball without the *.plx file as upstream didn't reply
until now. Thus we're fine from Fedora Legal aspects.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 225639] Merge Review: cdrdao

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225639





--- Comment #12 from Denis Leroy de...@poolshark.org  2009-02-10 10:21:01 EDT 
---
Cdrdao is essentially in patch acceptance only mode. We can't use libscg, for
the well known licensing issues which I don't want to get into, but also
because of the broken way it does device scanning.

Anyways, this is about the cdrdao merge review, and cdrdao now has to be
compiled without libscg with the '--without-scg' option. It then uses the
native sg interface and works just fine (although you'll want to use the
current CVS trunk).

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484808] Review Request: python-linux-procfs - parser classes for information found in /proc

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484808





--- Comment #4 from Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo a...@redhat.com  2009-02-10 
10:28:16 EDT ---
Ok, I'll add the LICENSE text and will add is as %doc.

3) That is myself trying to share the same specfile with other distros, from
Red Hat, that still don't have eggs, like RHEL5 and 4 :-) If there is no
problem in leaving this, I'd prefer to have just one spec file.

Do you have any other suggestions before I tag 0.4.4 and push a new tarball
out?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 225639] Merge Review: cdrdao

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225639





--- Comment #13 from Jörg Schilling joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de  
2009-02-10 10:32:20 EDT ---
Please do not spread unproven claims.

There are no well known license issues, there hoewever
is a deffamation campaign against free software run by some
Debian guys.

Cdrtools had a full in depth license review done by the Sun
legal department in Autum 2008 and no license problem was found.
The Sun legal department found that there is no problem from 
letting GPLd software use CDDLs libraries.

On the other side, the cdrtools fork currently distributed by
redhat cannot be distributed legally as it is in conflict 
with GPL and Copyright.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 483205] Review Request: eclipse-systemtapgui - GUI interface for SystemTap

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483205


Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-review+




--- Comment #26 from Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com  2009-02-10 10:41:27 
EDT ---
Thanks for the changes.  It looks good.  This package is approved.

Now you need to apply for sponsorship (I'll sponsor you -- see
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join) and do the fedora-cvs
stuff (see
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CVSAdminProcedure). Then
you'll need to close this bug as per
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process .  Thanks, Anithra!

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484476] Review Request: telepathy-farsight - Telepathy client to handle media streaming channels

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484476


Brian Pepple bdpep...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-cvs?




--- Comment #5 from Brian Pepple bdpep...@gmail.com  2009-02-10 10:40:45 EDT 
---
New Package CVS Request
===
Package Name: telepathy-farsight
Short Description: telepathy client to handle media streaming channels 
Owners: bpepple
Branches: 
InitialCC:

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 478767] Review Request: spring - Realtime strategy game

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478767


Nils Philippsen nphil...@redhat.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||nphil...@redhat.com




-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 464016] Review Request: eclipse-findbugs - Eclipse plugin for FindBugs

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=464016


Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||overh...@redhat.com




--- Comment #3 from Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com  2009-02-10 10:44:44 
EDT ---
Hi Jerry,

This package generally looks okay but it needs to be updated for the new
Eclipse plugin packaging guidelines for post-3.4 (we're using the p2 dropins
functionality now).  When you have time to update it, let me know and I'll do a
formal review.

Andrew

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 225639] Merge Review: cdrdao

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225639





--- Comment #14 from Denis Leroy de...@poolshark.org  2009-02-10 10:49:18 EDT 
---
This needs to move somewhere else, I don't want to get into the whole licensing
debate nonsense, and it's irrelevant to this review.

The fact remains: libscg can't be used on linux distros for purely technical
reasons (device scanning, ConsoleKit support), and I don't even know why cdrdao
used it in the first place. The current cdrdao CVS trunk can be compiled to use
the native SG interface, and if something doesn't work I'll commit the
necessary patches.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484808] Review Request: python-linux-procfs - parser classes for information found in /proc

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484808





--- Comment #5 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com  2009-02-10 10:53:55 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #4)
 Ok, I'll add the LICENSE text and will add is as %doc.
 

== thanks.

 3) That is myself trying to share the same specfile with other distros, from
 Red Hat, that still don't have eggs, like RHEL5 and 4 :-) If there is no
 problem in leaving this, I'd prefer to have just one spec file.
==That is valid reason then. you can keep if..endif

 
 Do you have any other suggestions before I tag 0.4.4 and push a new tarball
 out?

=== yes. check rpmlint on binary rpm

python-linux-procfs.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/python_linux_procfs-0.1-py2.5.egg-info

you need to chmod 644
/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/python_linux_procfs-0.1-py2.5.egg-info

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 225639] Merge Review: cdrdao

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225639





--- Comment #15 from Jörg Schilling joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de  
2009-02-10 11:11:11 EDT ---
Do not try to discuss techical stuff if you miss the needed background.
information.

libscg works perfectly on Linux _because_ of device scanning and all
people who reported problems with the illegal software distributed with
various linix distributions are happy with the unmodified original
software.

Libscg is the oldest and best supported platform independend
SCSI pass through library.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484725] Review Request: eclipse-moreunit - Assisting in writing more unit tests plugin

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484725


Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||overh...@redhat.com
 AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|overh...@redhat.com
   Flag||fedora-review?




--- Comment #1 from Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com  2009-02-10 11:17:11 
EDT ---
Everything looks pretty good.  The Summary and Description need a bit of
attention.  For the summary I'd recommend something like:

An Eclipse plugin that assists with writing more unit tests

and for the description something like:

MoreUnit is an Eclipse plugin that should assist with writing more unit tests.
 It can decorate classes which have testcase(s) and mark methods in the editor
which are under test.  Renaming/moving classes/methods will cause moreUnit to
rename/move the corresponding test code.  Generation of test method stubs is
also possible.

Here's the rest of the review.  Lines beginning with non-* need attention.

X make sure lines are = 80 characters
 - the summary line is longer but will be fixed if you change it to something
   similar to what I suggest above

X changelog format okay
  - you probably want to use your actual email address :)

X skim the summary and description for typos, etc.
  - see above

? license text included in package and marked with %doc
  - could we speak with upstream about getting them to include a copy of the
EPL text?  Not a blocker.

X run rpmlint on the binary RPMs = no output

$ rpmlint ../RPMS/noarch/eclipse-moreunit-1.2.0-1.fc10.noarch.rpm 
eclipse-moreunit.noarch: W: no-documentation

To fix this, you could probably mark this (or both files in this directory) as
%doc:

eclipse-moreunit-fetched-src-V_1_2_0/org.moreunit.plugin/help/documentation.html

* BuildRequires are proper
* macros fine
* package is named appropriately
* it is legal for Fedora to distribute this
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* specfile name matches %{name}
* md5sum matches upstream
  - timestamp differences exist in my generated tarball but no content
differences exist
* correct buildroot
* %{?dist} used correctly
* packages meets FHS (http://www.pathname.com/fhs/)
* rpmlint on this package.srpm gives no output
* Summary tag does not end in a period 
* no PreReq
* specfile is legible
* package successfully compiles and builds on x86_64 (but is correctly noarch)
* summary and description fine
* specfile written in American English
* no -doc sub-package necessary
* not native, so no rpath, static linking, etc.
* no config files
* not a GUI app
* no -devel necessary
* install section begins with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT or %{buildroot}
* no translations so no locale handling
* no Requires(pre,post) 
* package not relocatable
* package contains code
* package owns all directories and files
* no %files duplicates
* file permissions fine
* %clean present
* %doc files do not affect runtime
  - they won't ...
* not a web app
* verify the final provides and requires of the binary RPMs
  - these look good to me

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 225639] Merge Review: cdrdao

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225639





--- Comment #16 from Denis Leroy de...@poolshark.org  2009-02-10 11:23:12 EDT 
---
 Do not try to discuss techical stuff if you miss the needed background.
 information.

Please stop polluting this BZ. You also know nothing about my technical
background.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484725] Review Request: eclipse-moreunit - Assisting in writing more unit tests plugin

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484725





--- Comment #2 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com  2009-02-10 
11:44:35 EDT ---
New version
Spec URL:
http://akurtakov.fedorapeople.org/eclipse-moreunit.spec
SRPM URL:
http://akurtakov.fedorapeople.org/eclipse-moreunit-1.2.0-2.fc10.src.rpm


(In reply to comment #1)
 Everything looks pretty good.  The Summary and Description need a bit of
 attention.  For the summary I'd recommend something like:
 
 An Eclipse plugin that assists with writing more unit tests
 
 and for the description something like:
 
 MoreUnit is an Eclipse plugin that should assist with writing more unit 
 tests.
  It can decorate classes which have testcase(s) and mark methods in the editor
 which are under test.  Renaming/moving classes/methods will cause moreUnit to
 rename/move the corresponding test code.  Generation of test method stubs is
 also possible.
 
 Here's the rest of the review.  Lines beginning with non-* need attention.
 
 X make sure lines are = 80 characters
  - the summary line is longer but will be fixed if you change it to something
similar to what I suggest above
Fixed.

 
 X changelog format okay
   - you probably want to use your actual email address :)
Fixed.
 
 X skim the summary and description for typos, etc.
   - see above
Fixed. I've used your suggestions.
 
 ? license text included in package and marked with %doc
   - could we speak with upstream about getting them to include a copy of the
 EPL text?  Not a blocker.
 
License is correctly put in the license tag in the feature.xml, which is
entirely correct for eclipse plugin. I don't think it is needed to contact
upstream to make such unneeded changes. 

 X run rpmlint on the binary RPMs = no output
 
 $ rpmlint ../RPMS/noarch/eclipse-moreunit-1.2.0-1.fc10.noarch.rpm 
 eclipse-moreunit.noarch: W: no-documentation
 
 To fix this, you could probably mark this (or both files in this directory) as
 %doc:
 
 eclipse-moreunit-fetched-src-V_1_2_0/org.moreunit.plugin/help/documentation.html
 

Fixed.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 457304] Review Request: gestikk - Mouse gestures for you to easily control your PC

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457304





--- Comment #4 from Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com  2009-02-10 11:48:16 EDT 
---
We don't need to stall this review for upstream.  As long as you ask them to
include the MIT license in some future release and fix the License tag in the
spec file, we can proceed.  I forgot to give you my suggestions for the Summary
and %description, though.  No offense intended, but I think the English can be
improved slightly.  Here's what I suggest.

Summary: Use mouse gestures to control your PC

%description
gestikk is a Python application for nearly all netwm-conforming window
managers.  It recognizes predefined mouse gestures and executes defined actions
in response.  For example, with the gesture down - left, you could run
Firefox or simulate a window manager keyboard shortcut.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484725] Review Request: eclipse-moreunit - Assisting in writing more unit tests plugin

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484725


Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+




--- Comment #3 from Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com  2009-02-10 11:53:31 
EDT ---
Looks good.  Thanks for the changes.  APPROVED.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484229] Review Request: qbittorrent - A bittorrent Client

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484229





--- Comment #32 from Eli Wapniarski e...@orbsky.homelinux.org  2009-02-10 
12:00:45 EDT ---
Your welcome.

Now, this I'm certain of, you will have to follow the procedure outlined in

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CVSAdminProcedure

Cheers.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484725] Review Request: eclipse-moreunit - Assisting in writing more unit tests plugin

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484725


Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-cvs?




--- Comment #4 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com  2009-02-10 
12:00:56 EDT ---
New Package CVS Request
===
Package Name: eclipse-moreunit
Short Description: An Eclipse plugin that assists with writing more unit tests
Owners: akurtakov
Branches: 
InitialCC: akurtakov

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484229] Review Request: qbittorrent - A bittorrent Client

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484229


Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED




--- Comment #33 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu  2009-02-10 12:06:16 EDT 
---
Lemme look over things quick (looks good at first glance), and I'll do the
sponsor thing.

Leigh, have you a fas account created?  If so, what username?  If not, do so
asap. :)  See:

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join#Get_a_Fedora_Account

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484229] Review Request: qbittorrent - A bittorrent Client

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484229





--- Comment #35 from leigh scott leigh123li...@googlemail.com  2009-02-10 
12:15:51 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #34)
 (In reply to comment #33)
  Lemme look over things quick (looks good at first glance), and I'll do the
  sponsor thing.
  
  Leigh, have you a fas account created?  If so, what username?  If not, do so
  asap. :)  See:
  
  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join#Get_a_Fedora_Account
 
 
 Hi Rex,
 
 Thank you for sponsoring me, my fas username= Leigh123linux
 
 
 Leigh


Sorry I made a mistake , it should be

username= leigh123linux

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484229] Review Request: qbittorrent - A bittorrent Client

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484229





--- Comment #34 from leigh scott leigh123li...@googlemail.com  2009-02-10 
12:13:46 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #33)
 Lemme look over things quick (looks good at first glance), and I'll do the
 sponsor thing.
 
 Leigh, have you a fas account created?  If so, what username?  If not, do so
 asap. :)  See:
 
 http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join#Get_a_Fedora_Account


Hi Rex,

Thank you for sponsoring me, my fas username= Leigh123linux


Leigh

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484676] Review Request: eclipse-dtp - Eclipse Data Tools Platform

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484676





--- Comment #2 from Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com  2009-02-10 12:15:13 
EDT ---
These minor things still stand:

(In reply to comment #1)
 - change the Requires: on java to be = (or maybe '='?) 1.5.0
 - I prefer to add a short name after dropins:
   %files
   %{eclipse_dropin} = %{eclipse_dropin}/dtp
 - please add a comment above the sed line getting rid of the sun.misc.Compare
 - should we add some comment(s) stating why we're only building the features 
 we
 are?

This last point is important.  Since we're not shipping any of the user-visible
features, we need to stress this.  Ideally we'd have a bug for building all of
DTP and then dependent bugs for any packages we need and/or modifications we
need in other packages.

 X verify the final provides and requires of the binary RPMs
   - other than the java one, things look good
 X make sure lines are = 80 characters
   - could you add some line continuations to fix this?

* package successfully compiles and builds

I evidently needed the rawhide SDK to build this.  We'll have to do an update
if we want this to be in Fedora 10, I guess.  It all builds and installs (and
is present after installation) fine now.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484597] Review Request: python-argparse - Optparse inspired command line parser for Python

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484597


Terje Røsten terje...@phys.ntnu.no changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-cvs?




--- Comment #3 from Terje Røsten terje...@phys.ntnu.no  2009-02-10 12:21:45 
EDT ---
-O1 creates *.pyo such that these will be present in the package and not
created on local fs when script are executed, which will cause problems when
the package is updated or removed.

Will fix your another recommendations.


Thanks for the quick review!


New Package CVS Request
===
Package Name: python-argparse
Short Description: Optparse inspired command line parser for Python
Owners: terjeros
Branches: F-9 F-10
InitialCC:

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 464014] Review Request: findbugs - Find bugs in Java code

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=464014





--- Comment #3 from Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com  2009-02-10 12:23:14 EDT 
---
I made a couple of minor tweaks to deal with updated packages on F-10/Rawhide:

Spec URL: http://jjames.fedorapeople.org/findbugs/findbugs.spec
SRPM URL: http://jjames.fedorapeople.org/findbugs/findbugs-1.3.7-2.src.rpm

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 481192] Review Request: perl-pgsql_perl5 - Pg - Perl5 extension for PostgreSQL

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481192





--- Comment #7 from Itamar Reis Peixoto ita...@ispbrasil.com.br  2009-02-10 
12:26:27 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #2)
 License should be GPL+ or Artistic

fixed --


http://ispbrasil.com.br/pgsql_perl/perl-pgsql_perl5.spec
http://ispbrasil.com.br/pgsql_perl/perl-pgsql_perl5-1.9.0-2.fc10.src.rpm


--

koji dist-f11

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1117595

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484229] Review Request: qbittorrent - A bittorrent Client

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484229





--- Comment #37 from leigh scott leigh123li...@googlemail.com  2009-02-10 
12:30:26 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #36)
 alrighty, looks good, sponsored.

I believe the next step is to request a CVS module and branches with the 
CVSAdminProcedure, is this correct?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 476832] Review Request: mydns - serve DNS records directly from an SQL database

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476832


Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+




--- Comment #23 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp  2009-02-10 
12:35:59 EDT ---
Well, 
- I noticed that info mydns does not work (it actually shows
  mydns(8) man page) (although info -f /usr/share/info/mydns.info.gz
  shows mydns info page). It seems that mydns.texi file itself
  needs fixing, however I won't make this bug blocked by this issue.


  This package (mydns) is APPROVED by mtasaka


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 471520] Review Request: rubygem-simple-rss - A simple, flexible, extensible, and liberal RSS and Atom reader for Ruby

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=471520


Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+




--- Comment #12 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp  2009-02-10 
12:43:12 EDT ---
Okay.

---
   This package (rubygem-simple-rss) is APPROVED by mtasaka
---

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484704] Review Request: libapogee - Library for Apogee CCD Cameras

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484704


Kevin Kofler ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks|478539  |




-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 457304] Review Request: gestikk - Mouse gestures for you to easily control your PC

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457304





--- Comment #5 from Nicoleau Fabien nicoleau.fab...@gmail.com  2009-02-10 
12:50:06 EDT ---
Update :
Spec URL: http://nicoleau.fabien.free.fr/rpms/SPECS/gestikk.spec
SRPM URL:
http://nicoleau.fabien.free.fr/rpms/srpms.fc10/gestikk-0.6.1-2.fc10.src.rpm

- License fix
- Summary and description update

Package builds on koji :
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1117685

Rpmlint is silent.

I've contacted upstream and asked for MIT license file in next release.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 457304] Review Request: gestikk - Mouse gestures for you to easily control your PC

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457304


Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+




--- Comment #6 from Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com  2009-02-10 13:00:12 EDT 
---
Looks good.  Please consider the summary and description changes I suggested in
comment #4.  APPROVED.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484726] Review Request: impressive - The stylish way of giving presentations

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484726


Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||joc...@herr-schmitt.de
 AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|joc...@herr-schmitt.de
   Flag||fedora-review?




--- Comment #1 from Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de  2009-02-10 
13:05:01 EDT ---
Good:
+ Package name fits with naming guidelines
+ Basename of the SPEC file matches with package name
+ SPEC file is clearly written.
+ Consistently usage of rpm macros
+ Package contains a License tag
+ Licese tag contains GPLv2+ as a valid OSS license
+ Package contains verbatin copy of the license text
+ Could downloading tar ball from upstream with spectool -g
+ Packaged tar ball matches with upstream
(md5sum: 492eda5e3e09beb2f6dc997ed94f5349)
+ Package contains no patches
+ Package contains not subpackages
+ %doc stanza is small, so we need no separate subpackage
+ Defintion of the BuildRoot is ok.
+ Buildroot will be cleaned on the beginning of %clean and %install
+ Local build works fine
+ Koji build works fine
+ Package will built for noarch
+ File permissions seems ok.
+ Package doesn't contains duplicates files.
+ All files are own by the package
+ No file has a conflict to other packages
+ Local install works fine
+ Local uninstall works fine
+ Package contains proper %changelog

Bad:
- License tag should be GPLv2 because copyright novice of
the source doesn't contains late version option
- Because the application needs OpenGL enable hardware
acceleration a Req. opengl-games-utils is required.
Addtionaly a wrapper is required.
- DejaVu-Sams-fonts are required for this package
- Script contains a reference to pdftk. This package is on 
review for rpmfusion, because there are licensing issues for
the current release.
- Its seems, that we will need python-opengl and python-imaging
- Please add a %build stanza and a comment which explains, that
no special build step is required.
- Please add -p switch to the install command in the %install stanza

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 457304] Review Request: gestikk - Mouse gestures for you to easily control your PC

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457304


Nicoleau Fabien nicoleau.fab...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-cvs?




--- Comment #7 from Nicoleau Fabien nicoleau.fab...@gmail.com  2009-02-10 
13:26:43 EDT ---
Thank you for the review. I've added python BR and used summary and description
you propoed in comment #4.

New Package CVS Request
===
Package Name: gestikk
Short Description: Use mouse gestures to control your PC
Owners: eponyme
Branches: F-9 F-10
InitialCC:

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484229] Review Request: qbittorrent - A bittorrent Client

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484229


leigh scott leigh123li...@googlemail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-cvs?




--- Comment #38 from leigh scott leigh123li...@googlemail.com  2009-02-10 
13:35:14 EDT ---
New Package CVS Request
===
Package Name: qbittorrent
Short Description: A bittorrent Client
Owners: leigh123linux
Branches: F-9 F-10
InitialCC:leigh123linux

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484934] New: Review Request: vidalia - QT-GUI for tor

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

Summary: Review Request: vidalia - QT-GUI for tor

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484934

   Summary: Review Request: vidalia - QT-GUI for tor
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
  Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org
ReportedBy: cassmod...@fedoraproject.org
 QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com
   Estimated Hours: 0.0
Classification: Fedora


Spec URL: 
http://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/vidalia-0.1.10/vidalia.spec

SRPM URL: 
http://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/vidalia-0.1.10/vidalia-0.1.10-1.fc10.src.rpm

Description:
Vidalia is a cross-platform controller GUI for Tor, built using the Qt 
framework. Vidalia allows you to start and stop Tor, view the status of 
Tor at a glance, and monitor Tor's bandwidth usage. Vidalia also makes it easy 
to contribute to the Tor network by helping you setup a Tor server, if 
you wish.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484932] New: Review Request: libwpg - Library for importing and converting Corel WordPerfect Graphics images

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

Summary: Review Request: libwpg - Library for importing and converting Corel 
WordPerfect Graphics images

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484932

   Summary: Review Request: libwpg - Library for importing and
converting Corel WordPerfect Graphics images
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
  Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org
ReportedBy: cassmod...@fedoraproject.org
 QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com
   Estimated Hours: 0.0
Classification: Fedora


Spec URL:
http://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/libwpg-0.1.3/libwpg.spec

SRPM URL:
http://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/libwpg-0.1.3/libwpg-0.1.3-1.fc10.src.rpm

Description:
libwpg is a library for reading and converting WPG images

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484933] New: Review Request: libwps - Library for reading and converting Microsoft Works word processor documents

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

Summary: Review Request: libwps - Library for reading and converting Microsoft 
Works word processor documents

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484933

   Summary: Review Request: libwps - Library for reading and
converting Microsoft Works word processor documents
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
  Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org
ReportedBy: cassmod...@fedoraproject.org
 QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com
   Estimated Hours: 0.0
Classification: Fedora


Spec URL:
http://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/libwps-0.1.2/libwps.spec

SRPM URL:
http://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/libwps-0.1.2/libwps-0.1.2-1.fc10.src.rpm

Description:
Library that handles Microsoft Works documents.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484931] New: Renaming Review Request: hosts3d - 3D real-time network visualiser

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

Summary: Renaming Review Request: hosts3d - 3D real-time network visualiser

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484931

   Summary: Renaming Review Request: hosts3d - 3D real-time
network visualiser
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
  Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
 Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org
ReportedBy: cassmod...@fedoraproject.org
 QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com
   Estimated Hours: 0.0
Classification: Fedora


Spec URL: 
http://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/hosts3d-0.97/hosts3d.spec

SRPM URL: 
http://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/hosts3d-0.97/hosts3d-0.97-1.fc10.src.rpm

Description: 
Hosts3D is a 3D real-time network visualizer, displaying 
hosts and packet traffic. Features include support for 
multiple sensors, analysis of packets to gather hostnames 
and services, configurable layout of subnetworks, 
recording/replaying of packet traffic, and the ability 
to filter packets by host, protocol or port. 
hsen (Hosts3D Sensor) is a packet capture daemon which
reads and sends packet header information to Hosts3D, 
locally or remotely. hsen also equates hostname to IP 
by reading DNS packets (UDP type A class IN standard 
query response). The relationship between hsen to Hosts3D 
can be one-to-one, one-to-many, many-to-one or many-to-many 
(many Hosts3Ds would be on multiple computers on the 
same subnet, receiving packet header information 
from hsen via broadcast).

Info:
Upstream named Homestead in Hosts3D because there is a commercial application
called Homestead.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 476832] Review Request: mydns - serve DNS records directly from an SQL database

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476832


Itamar Reis Peixoto ita...@ispbrasil.com.br changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-cvs?




--- Comment #24 from Itamar Reis Peixoto ita...@ispbrasil.com.br  2009-02-10 
14:00:31 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #23)

I will add this to my TODO list.


New Package CVS Request
===
Package Name: mydns
Short Description:  Serve DNS records directly from an SQL database
Owners: itamarjp
Branches: F-10
InitialCC:

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484229] Review Request: qbittorrent - A bittorrent Client

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484229





--- Comment #39 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net  2009-02-10 
14:04:10 EDT ---
I've pointed out in comment 12 that it won't build on anything older than F11
Development (Rawhide). Requesting branches is pointless. Unless you get
rb_libtorrent version upgrades for F-10 and F-9.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 464016] Review Request: eclipse-findbugs - Eclipse plugin for FindBugs

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=464016





--- Comment #4 from Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com  2009-02-10 14:10:46 EDT 
---
I have updated it:

http://jjames.fedorapeople.org/eclipse-findbugs/eclipse-findbugs.spec
http://jjames.fedorapeople.org/eclipse-findbugs/eclipse-findbugs-1.3.7-2.src.rpm

The package isn't set up to make use of pdebuild possible out of the box, and
I'm apparently not smart enough to figure out what to do about that, so I'm
sticking with the ant build for now.

Note that this package depends on the findbugs application itself (bz #464014),
which depends on a library named jFormatString (bz #475603).  Both of those are
still awaiting review.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 478962] Review Request: libwpg - Library for reading WordPerfect Graphics images

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478962


Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||cassmod...@fedoraproject.or
   ||g




--- Comment #5 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp  2009-02-10 
14:21:02 EDT ---
*** Bug 484932 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484932] Review Request: libwpg - Library for importing and converting Corel WordPerfect Graphics images

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484932


Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution||DUPLICATE




--- Comment #1 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp  2009-02-10 
14:21:02 EDT ---
This one is already in Fedora
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packages/name/libwpg

If you want this package for older branches, please ask
the current maintainer.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 478962 ***

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 464016] Review Request: eclipse-findbugs - Eclipse plugin for FindBugs

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=464016


Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|overh...@redhat.com
   Flag||fedora-review?




--- Comment #5 from Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com  2009-02-10 14:20:02 
EDT ---
pdebuild was designed to make it easy for us to build packages where no
upstream build mechanism is exposed (or easily re-usable outside of upstream's
build environment).  If this project provides a usable ant script that works,
by all means, use it :)  It's better to stick with the way upstream does it.

I can review this package and I'll see what I can do about the other packages.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 468189] Review Request: rear - Relax and Recovery (disaster recovery framework)

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468189


Gratien D'haese gratien.dha...@it3.be changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-review?  |




-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 468189] Review Request: rear - Relax and Recovery (disaster recovery framework)

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468189


Gratien D'haese gratien.dha...@it3.be changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-review?




-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484229] Review Request: qbittorrent - A bittorrent Client

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484229





--- Comment #40 from leigh scott leigh123li...@googlemail.com  2009-02-10 
14:42:46 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #39)
 I've pointed out in comment 12 that it won't build on anything older than F11
 Development (Rawhide). Requesting branches is pointless. Unless you get
 rb_libtorrent version upgrades for F-10 and F-9.


I am aware of the rb_libtorrent issue with F-9  F-10, I am just running 
qbittorrent-1.2.1-2.fc10.src.rpm though mock now and I will upload the spec 
srpm for inspection when it's complete.

qbittorrent-1.2.1-2.fc10.src.rpm will build OK with rb_libtorrent-devel =
0.13.1

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 480538] Review Request: iptux -- a tool for sharing and transporting files and directories in Lan

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480538





--- Comment #14 from Caius kaio Chance c...@dejieshi.com  2009-02-10 
14:51:38 EDT ---
Created an attachment (id=331461)
 -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=331461)
build.log of mock rebuild, on 'fedora-devel-i386'

I ain't sure if my F10 compiler has anything effects on this, but mock has
following compilation error:

utils.cpp:95: error: invalid conversion from 'const char*' to 'char*'

(FYI, my command `mock -r fedora-devel-i386 --rebuild
iptux-0.4.4-1.fc10.src.rpm` which mock supposed to build for rawhide)

Has this srpm built correctly on real rawhide? As devel tree will be the first
cvs tree created if package review is approved, might you provide
iptux-0.4.4-1.devel.src.rpm if possible.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 480538] Review Request: iptux -- a tool for sharing and transporting files and directories in Lan

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480538





--- Comment #15 from Caius kaio Chance c...@dejieshi.com  2009-02-10 
14:53:38 EDT ---
How about getting latest working rawhide to create your srpm?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484229] Review Request: qbittorrent - A bittorrent Client

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484229





--- Comment #41 from Eli Wapniarski e...@orbsky.homelinux.org  2009-02-10 
14:53:58 EDT ---
Any particular reason why rb_libtorrent 0.14 is not being built for Fedora 10
and 9. I conducted my review on Fedora 10 after successfully building
rb_libtorrent on Fedora 10.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484229] Review Request: qbittorrent - A bittorrent Client

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484229





--- Comment #42 from leigh scott leigh123li...@googlemail.com  2009-02-10 
15:13:32 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #39)
 I've pointed out in comment 12 that it won't build on anything older than F11
 Development (Rawhide). Requesting branches is pointless. Unless you get
 rb_libtorrent version upgrades for F-10 and F-9.


I am aware of the rb_libtorrent issue with F-9  F-10, I am just running 
qbittorrent-1.2.1-2.fc10.src.rpm though mock now and I will upload the spec 
srpm for inspection when it's complete.

qbittorrent-1.2.1-2.fc10.src.rpm will build OK with rb_libtorrent-devel =
0.13.1

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484229] Review Request: qbittorrent - A bittorrent Client

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484229





--- Comment #43 from leigh scott leigh123li...@googlemail.com  2009-02-10 
15:17:15 EDT ---
Here's a F10 version that uses rb_libtorrent-devel =
0.13.1


Spec URL: http://dnmouse.org/fedora/qbittorrent_review/10/qbittorrent.spec



SRPM URL:
http://dnmouse.org/fedora/qbittorrent_review/10/qbittorrent-1.2.1-2.fc10.src.rpm


Patch URL:
http://dnmouse.org/fedora/qbittorrent_review/10/qbittorrent_flag.patch

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 477570] Review Request: couchdb - A document database server, accessible via a RESTful JSON API

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477570





--- Comment #3 from Allisson Azevedo allis...@gmail.com  2009-02-10 15:29:29 
EDT ---
Update package:

Spec URL: http://allisson.fedorapeople.org/packages/couchdb/couchdb.spec

SRPM URL:
http://allisson.fedorapeople.org/packages/couchdb/couchdb-0.8.1-2.fc10.src.rpm

Rpmlint output:

[allis...@notebook RPMS]$ rpmlint couchdb-0.8.1-2.fc11.i386.rpm 
couchdb.i386: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/couchdb couchdb
couchdb.i386: W: non-standard-uid /var/run/couchdb couchdb
couchdb.i386: W: non-standard-uid /var/log/couchdb couchdb
couchdb.i386: E: invalid-soname
/usr/lib/couchdb/erlang/lib/couch-0.8.1-incubating/priv/lib/couch_erl_driver.so
couch_erl_driver.so
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 3 warnings.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484808] Review Request: python-linux-procfs - parser classes for information found in /proc

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484808





--- Comment #6 from Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo a...@redhat.com  2009-02-10 
15:32:04 EDT ---
I did that and fixed it for the ones that comes from the tarball, but didn't
knew how to silence the one about the eggs, will do, tag 0.4.4.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Bug 484808] Review Request: python-linux-procfs - parser classes for information found in /proc

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484808





--- Comment #7 from Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo a...@redhat.com  2009-02-10 
16:20:47 EDT ---
Here it goes, hopefully doing everything we agreed upon here:

Spec URL:
http://fedorapeople.org/~acme/fedora/python-linux-procfs/python-linux-procfs.spec
SRPM URL:
http://fedorapeople.org/~acme/fedora/python-linux-procfs/python-linux-procfs-0.4.4-1.fc10.src.rpm

Thanks a lot!

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review