[Bug 487392] Review Request: crash-catcher - apps crash detecting daemon
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=487392
--- Comment #1 from Dan Horák d...@danny.cz 2009-02-26 03:18:21 EDT ---
formal review is here, see the notes below:
BAD source files match upstream:
OK package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
BAD specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros
consistently.
OK dist tag is present.
OK license field matches the actual license.
OK license is open source-compatible (GPLv2+). License text included in
package.
OK latest version is being packaged.
OK* BuildRequires are proper.
OK compiler flags are appropriate.
OK %clean is present.
OK package builds in mock (Rawhide/x86_64).
OK debuginfo package looks complete.
BAD rpmlint is silent.
OK final provides and requires look sane.
N/A %check is present and all tests pass.
OK shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths, correct
scriptlets exists
BAD owns the directories it creates.
OK doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
OK no duplicates in %files.
Ok file permissions are appropriate.
BAD scriptlets present.
OK code, not content.
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.
BAD not a GUI app
- full URL to source archive is missing
- no need to specify License in all sub-packages, it is inherited from the main
package
- parallel make is not used (use make %{?_smp_mflags})
- when you decide to create a -devel subpackage, then you must move the
libraries from the main package to a -libs sub-package to be multilib compliant
- use %{_initddir} instead of /etc/rc.d/init.d
- no need to specify BR: glib2-devel, it is resolved automatically via
gtkmm24-devel
- rpmlint complains a bit
crash-catcher.x86_64: W: no-documentation
= mark COPYING and README as %doc
crash-catcher.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/libUtils.so
crash-catcher.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib64/libMiddleWare.so
= you probably want a devel subpackage
crash-catcher.x86_64: E: executable-marked-as-config-file
/etc/rc.d/init.d/crash-catcher
crash-catcher.x86_64: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag
/etc/rc.d/init.d/crash-catcher
= remove %config from the initsctript
crash-catcher.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/sbin/crash-catcher
['/usr/lib64']
crash-catcher.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath
/usr/lib64/libMiddleWare.so.0.0.1 ['/usr/lib64']
crash-catcher-addon-ccpp.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath
/usr/libexec/hookCCpp ['/usr/lib64']
= http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Removing_Rpath
crash-catcher-gui.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
/usr/share/crash-catcher/CCMainWindow.py 0644
crash-catcher-gui.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
/usr/share/crash-catcher/CCDBusBackend.py 0644
= drop the shebang lines from the scrips, they are not intended to be run on
their own
crash-catcher-gui.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/bin/cc-gui
= add it
crash-catcher-addon-ccpp.x86_64: W: no-documentation
crash-catcher-applet.x86_64: W: no-documentation
crash-catcher-gui.x86_64: W: no-documentation
crash-catcher-plugin-logger.x86_64: W: no-documentation
crash-catcher-plugin-mailx.x86_64: W: no-documentation
crash-catcher-plugin-sqlite3.x86_64: W: no-documentation
= can be ignored now
crash-catcher-plugin-mailx.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long
= fix
crash-catcher-addon-ccpp.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib64/crash-catcher/libCCpp.so
crash-catcher-plugin-logger.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib64/crash-catcher/libLogger.so
crash-catcher-plugin-mailx.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib64/crash-catcher/libMailx.so
crash-catcher-plugin-sqlite3.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib64/crash-catcher/libSQLite3.so
= link plugins with -avoid-version in LDFLAGS, then it is ok to have *.so
in a non-devel package
- unowned directories:
%{_sysconfdir}/%{name}
%{_sysconfdir}/%{name}/plugins
%{_libdir}/%{name}
%{_datadir}/%{name}
first 3 should be owned by the main package, the last one by the -gui
sub-package
- the preun scriptlet controls rarpd
- plugins are usually linked with -avoid-version in LDFLAGS
- desktop file is missing for the gui
--
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 485052] Review Request: mingw32-crossreport - Analysis tool to help cross-compilation to Windows
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=485052 Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #4 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-02-26 04:29:01 EDT --- This is all in Fedora now, thanks! -- 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
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 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||akurt...@redhat.com --- Comment #32 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2009-02-26 05:20:41 EDT --- Hi Anithra, Will you close the bug as the plugin is in repos? Thanks, Alexander Kurtakov -- 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 485941] Review Request: eclipse-valgrind - Eclipse Valgrind Integration
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=485941 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||akurt...@redhat.com --- Comment #6 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2009-02-26 05:22:31 EDT --- Elliott, You builded the plugin in rawhide so will you close the bug? Thanks, Alexander Kurtakov -- 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 470727] Review Request: slimdata - Tools and library for reading and writing slim compressed data
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=470727 --- Comment #13 from Lucian Langa co...@gnome.eu.org 2009-02-26 05:40:38 EDT --- Review: OK source files match upstream: c69db6265da59079263043dc5f5540e67f6d35cabed54016a17a5e82f31326d2 slim-2.6.1b.tgz OK package meets naming and versioning guidelines. OK specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. OK summary a short and concise description. OK description is OK. OK dist tag is present. OK build root is sane. NOT OK license field matches the actual license. OK license is open source-compatible. OK license text included in package. OK latest version is being packaged. OK BuildRequires are proper. OK compiler flags are appropriate. OK %clean is present. OK package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64). OK package installs properly. OK debuginfo package looks complete. OK rpmlint has acceptable warnings. OK final provides and requires are sane: slimdata-2.6.1b-4.fc11.x86_64.rpm libslim.so.0()(64bit) slimdata = 2.6.1b-4.fc11 slimdata(x86-64) = 2.6.1b-4.fc11 = /sbin/ldconfig libc.so.6()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libslim.so.0()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) slimdata-devel-2.6.1b-4.fc11.x86_64.rpm slimdata-devel = 2.6.1b-4.fc11 slimdata-devel(x86-64) = 2.6.1b-4.fc11 = libslim.so.0()(64bit) pkgconfig slimdata = 2.6.1b-4.fc11 OK %check is present and all tests pass: Running compression data-type tests on /tmp/data_partial.bin (size 100)... ...Passed all 8 data-type tests Running compression tests on /tmp/data_partial.bin (size 100)... ...Passed all 16 compression tests Running expansion tests on /tmp/data_partial.bin (size 100)... ...Passed all 17 expansion tests Running compression data-type tests on /tmp/data_partial.bin (size 103)... ...Passed all 8 data-type tests Running compression data-type tests on /tmp/data_partial.bin (size 524289)... ...Passed all 8 data-type tests Running compression data-type tests on /tmp/data_partial.bin (size 524287)... ...Passed all 8 data-type tests Running compression data-type tests on /tmp/fake_test_data.bin (size 2000)... ...Passed all 8 data-type tests Running compression tests on /tmp/fake_test_data.bin (size 2000)... ...Passed all 16 compression tests Running expansion tests on /tmp/fake_test_data.bin (size 2000)... ...Passed all 2 expansion tests OK shared libraries are present, ldconfig called properly OK owns the directories it creates. OK doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. OK no duplicates in %files. OK file permissions are appropriate. OK no scriptlets present. OK code, not content. OK documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. OK %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. OK headers are in a separate -devel package. OK no pkgconfig files. OK no libtool .la droppings. Blocker: License field should be GPL+ Suggestions: please consider preserving timestamps of installed files (adding INSTALL=install -p to make install target in %install section) -- 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 487094] Review Request: stp - Constraint solver/decision procedure
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=487094
Marcela Maslanova mmasl...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mmasl...@redhat.com
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Marcela Maslanova mmasl...@redhat.com 2009-02-26
06:28:49 EDT ---
OK Rpmlint must be run on every package.
OK The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .
OK The spec file name must match the base package %{name}.
OK The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
OK The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license.
OK The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
OK If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file.
OK The spec file must be written in American English.
OK The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
OK The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source.
OK The package MUST successfully compile.
OK Correct BuildRequires.
OK Proper use of %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly
forbidden.
OK Shared library files (not just symlinks) must call ldconfig in %post and
%postun.
OK Relocatable package must state this fact in the request for review.
OK A package must own all directories that it creates.
OK A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
OK Permissions on files must be set properly.
OK Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
OK Each package must consistently use macros.
OK The package must contain code, or permissable content.
OK Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
OK If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of
the application.
OK Header files must be in a -devel package.
OK Static libraries must be in a -static package.
OK Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'.
OK Library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1) and files that end in .so
(without suffix) must go in -devel.
OK In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package.
OK Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
OK Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file.
OK At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
Usually are all packages and subpackages on the top of spec and check part is
placed before %files. This is little confusing.
It's better to use macro for release version 0.1-11-18-2008 for future updates.
Also you don't have to create doc for devel package, it the base package
includes them and it's required by devel package.
--
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 487312] Review Request: tuned - A dynamic adaptive system tuning daemon
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=487312
--- Comment #2 from Phil Knirsch pknir...@redhat.com 2009-02-26 07:48:16 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #1)
Hm, I wonder why there is a devel-dependency for kernel-debuginfo. I see that
the scripts are systemtap scripts. Therefore this should be OK.
Yea, i was wondering about that as well. Seems that rpmlint assumes that if you
install a debuginfo package you want to to development instead of debugging. ;)
Packaging guidelines:
Can you please fix the URL for the git tree to be consistent and maybe add a
description how to get the proper version from git? Please also fix the url in
the wiki page. (See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL)
Added the following over the Source tag:
# The source for this package was pulled from upstream git. Use the
# following commands to get the corresponding tarball:
# git clone git://fedorapeople.org/~pknirsch/tuned.git/
# cd tuned
# git checkout v%{version}
# make archive
(similar to the upstream CVS description in the SourceURL docu)
Can you please use %(mktemp -ud
%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XX) for Buildroot? (See:
BuildRoot tag at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines)
Fixed.
Please fix whitespaces in the GPL headers (example: tuned).
Fixed.
Why is tuningplugins/__init__.py empty?
Intentionally left empty. ;) But in all seriousness, Python packages require
you to install at least an empty __init__.py to work, see
http://docs.python.org/tutorial/modules.html#packages. I've added a comment
line to both __init__.py files now.
Why is there a reference to configure in INSTALL. There is no configure script
at all.
Uhm, yea, thats was just the standard GNU INSTALL file. I've stripped it down
a little now so it only contains what really can be done.
New packages are now up:
Spec URL: http://pknirsch.fedorapeople.org/src/tuned.spec
SRPM URL: http://pknirsch.fedorapeople.org/src/tuned-0.1.1-1.fc10.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 453395] Review Request: OpenChange - Microsoft Exchange access with native protocols
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=453395 Matthew Barnes mbar...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #27 from Matthew Barnes mbar...@redhat.com 2009-02-26 07:51:05 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: openchange Short Description: Microsoft Exchange access with native protocols Owners: mbarnes 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 487421] Review Request: libyaml - YAML 1.1 parser and emitter written in C
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=487421 --- Comment #2 from John Eckersberg jecke...@redhat.com 2009-02-26 08:15:23 EDT --- I modelled my spec after libxml2, which split static out into it's own package. It really doesn't matter to me, so I'll just move it into the -devel package. Updated: Spec URL: http://jeckersb.fedorapeople.org/libyaml/libyaml.spec SRPM URL: http://jeckersb.fedorapeople.org/libyaml/libyaml-0.1.2-2.fc10.src.rpm Thanks for looking at 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 487507] New: Review Request: perl-Class-XSAccessor-Array - Generate fast XS accessors without runtime compilation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: perl-Class-XSAccessor-Array - Generate fast XS accessors without runtime compilation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487507 Summary: Review Request: perl-Class-XSAccessor-Array - Generate fast XS accessors without runtime compilation Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mmasl...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/perl-Class-XSAccessor-Array/perl-Class-XSAccessor-Array.spec SRPM URL: http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/perl-Class-XSAccessor-Array/perl-Class-XSAccessor-Array-0.14-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: The module implements fast XS accessors both for getting at and setting an object attribute. Additionally, the module supports mutators and simple predicates (has_foo() like tests for definedness of an attributes). The module works only with objects that are implemented as arrays. Using it on hash-based objects is bound to make your life miserable. Refer to Class::XSAccessor for an implementation that works with hash-based objects. -- 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 487507] Review Request: perl-Class-XSAccessor-Array - Generate fast XS accessors without runtime compilation
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=487507 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||panem...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com 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 487507] Review Request: perl-Class-XSAccessor-Array - Generate fast XS accessors without runtime compilation
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=487507 --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2009-02-26 08:48:06 EDT --- package build failed. koji build = http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1190374 Suggestions: 1) You don't need following in SPEC Requires: perl(AutoXS::Header) = 0.02 2) Missing BuildRequires: perl(Test::More) -- 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 485007] Review Request: rhnpush - Package uploader for the RHN Satellite/Spacewalk Server
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=485007 Marcela Maslanova mmasl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||CURRENTRELEASE -- 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 479895] Review Request: perl-DDL-Oracle - DDL generator for Oracle databases
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=479895 Marcela Maslanova mmasl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||CURRENTRELEASE -- 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 485007] Review Request: rhnpush - Package uploader for the RHN Satellite/Spacewalk Server
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=485007 Miroslav Suchy msu...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|CURRENTRELEASE | Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? -- 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
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 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 249059] Review Request: wdaemon - hotplug helper for wacom x.org driver
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=249059 Aristeu Rozanski aroza...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution||CURRENTRELEASE --- Comment #17 from Aristeu Rozanski aroza...@redhat.com 2009-02-26 09:35:44 EDT --- The package is in. closing the 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 483865] Review Request: bpg-fonts - Georgian Unicode fonts
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=483865 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-26 09:32:17 EDT --- bpg-fonts-20090205-5.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/bpg-fonts-20090205-5.fc9 -- 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 483865] Review Request: bpg-fonts - Georgian Unicode fonts
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=483865 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-26 09:32:22 EDT --- bpg-fonts-20090205-5.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/bpg-fonts-20090205-5.fc10 -- 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 487521] New: Review Request: pypar - Parallel programming with Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: pypar - Parallel programming with Python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487521 Summary: Review Request: pypar - Parallel programming with Python Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: jussi.leht...@iki.fi QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://theory.physics.helsinki.fi/~jzlehtol/rpms/pypar.spec SRPM URL: http://theory.physics.helsinki.fi/~jzlehtol/rpms/pypar-2.1.0_53-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Pypar is an efficient but easy-to-use module that allows programs written in Python to run in parallel on multiple processors and communicate using message passing. Pypar provides bindings to a subset of the message passing interface standard MPI. rpmlint output: pypar.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/share/pypar-2.1.0_53/demos/mandelbrot_example/mandelplot_ext.c pypar.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/pypar-2.1.0_53/demos/demo3.py 0644 pypar.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib64/python2.5/site-packages/pypar/test_init.py 0644 pypar.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib64/python2.5/site-packages/pypar/network_timing.py 0644 pypar.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/pypar-2.1.0_53/demos/demo.py 0644 pypar.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/pypar-2.1.0_53/demos/demo4.py 0644 pypar.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib64/python2.5/site-packages/pypar/test_pypar.py 0644 pypar.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/pypar-2.1.0_53/demos/mandelbrot_example/mandel_sequential.py 0644 pypar.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/share/pypar-2.1.0_53/demos/mandelbrot_example/mandel_ext.c pypar.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/pypar-2.1.0_53/demos/demo2.py 0644 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 8 errors, 2 warnings. Contacted upstream to fix the non-executable-script errors. devel-file-in-non-devel-package warnings should not cause any concern, since they are demo files for using the package. -- 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 470727] Review Request: slimdata - Tools and library for reading and writing slim compressed data
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=470727 --- Comment #14 from Matthew Truch m...@truch.net 2009-02-26 09:46:52 EDT --- (In reply to comment #13) Blocker: License field should be GPL+ The included license is GPLv3, and most of the source files don't have a copyright/license notice. Is this from the src/crc.h which includes code from gzip 1.2.4 and has a license notice? Downloading gzip 1.2.4 indicates that it is covered by GPLv2. I guess this is a little more ambiguous than I thought. I have contacted upstream about this so they can properly clarify what they want. Suggestions: please consider preserving timestamps of installed files (adding INSTALL=install -p to make install target in %install section) Timestamps are preserved already with install -p; for example, see the build log from my most recent koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=1159537name=build.log Are you seeing a situation where install is called without the -p 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 472791] Review Request: fontbox - A Java library for parsing font files
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=472791 Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(mefos...@gmail.co ||m) --- Comment #5 from Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com 2009-02-26 09:51:19 EDT --- Let me know when you are ready to continue this 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 478743] Review Request: saga - SAGA is a free, hybrid, cross-platform GIS software
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=478743 Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(cristian.bal...@g ||mail.com) --- Comment #5 from Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com 2009-02-26 09:53:17 EDT --- Let me know when you are ready to proceed with this 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 442233] Review Request: oprofileui - user interface for analysing oprofile data
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=442233 Dave Jones da...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||WORKSFORME -- 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 485941] Review Request: eclipse-valgrind - Eclipse Valgrind Integration
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=485941 Elliott Baron eba...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||CURRENTRELEASE --- Comment #7 from Elliott Baron eba...@redhat.com 2009-02-26 10:03:28 EDT --- Completed. -- 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 470727] Review Request: slimdata - Tools and library for reading and writing slim compressed data
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=470727 --- Comment #15 from Lucian Langa co...@gnome.eu.org 2009-02-26 10:02:15 EDT --- (In reply to comment #14) The included license is GPLv3, and most of the source files don't have a copyright/license notice. Is this from the src/crc.h which includes code from gzip 1.2.4 and has a license notice? No. Paragraph 9 of COPYING: If the Program does not specify a version number of this License, you may choose any version ever published by the Free Software Foundation. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing says: A GPL or LGPL licensed package that lacks any statement of what version that it's licensed under in the source code/program output/accompanying docs is technically licensed under *any* version of the GPL or LGPL, not just the version in whatever COPYING file they include. I have contacted upstream about this so they can properly clarify what they want. The best way is to contact upstream to ask the version of the license and add headers to source files or perhaps state this in README file. Timestamps are preserved already with install -p; for example, see the build log from my most recent koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=1159537name=build.log Are you seeing a situation where install is called without the -p flag? you're right disregard 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 487312] Review Request: tuned - A dynamic adaptive system tuning daemon
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=487312
Thomas Woerner twoer...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||needinfo?(pknir...@redhat.c
||om)
--- Comment #3 from Thomas Woerner twoer...@redhat.com 2009-02-26 10:14:53
EDT ---
MUST Items
--
[WARN] rpmlint output
$ rpmlint tuned-0.1.1-1.fc10.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
$ rpmlint tuned-0.1.1-1.fc11.noarch.rpm
tuned.noarch: W: incoherent-subsys /etc/rc.d/init.d/tuned $prog
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
[OK] The warning here can be ignored, it is not incoherent, because $prog
contains the correct value.
$ rpmlint tuned-utils-0.1.1-1.fc11.noarch.rpm
tuned-utils.noarch: W: no-documentation
tuned-utils.noarch: E: devel-dependency kernel-debuginfo
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings.
[WARN] There is no description for the utils package.
[OK] The error can be ignored, the kernel-debuginfo package is requires to use
systemtap.
[OK] Named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[OK] The spec file name must match the base package.
[FAIL/INFO] The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
FAIL: The description is not more than the summary. Please add some more
information maybe on how it is working or how it should be used.
INFO: There is a README and README.txt. What is the difference?
[OK] Meets the Licensing Guidelines (GPLv2+).
[OK] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[OK] License file included in %doc.
[OK] Spec file written in American English.
[OK] Spec file is legible.
[OK] Source matches upstream.
[OK] Package successfully compiles and builds at least one primary
architecture.
[OK] No build dependencies.
[OK] No localized files, therefore no locale support needed.
[OK] No schared libs, therefore no ldconfig needed.
[OK] Not relocatable.
[OK] Package ownes all directories it creates.
[OK] Does not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
[OK] Permissions on files are set properly.
[OK] Has a correct %clean section.
[OK] Macros consistently used.
[OK] Code or permissible content.
[OK] No large documentation files, therefore no -doc subpackage needed.
[OK] %doc files don't affect runtime.
[OK] No header files and no libraries, therefore no -devel subpackage needed.
[OK] No static libs, therefore no -static subpackage needed.
[OK] No pkgconfig file, therefore no requires for pkgconfig needed.
[OK] No GUI applications, therefore no %{name}.desktop file needed.
[OK] Does not own files or directories already owned by other packages.
[OK] Cleanup at the beginning of %install.
[OK] All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8.
SHOULD Items
[OK] License file included.
[BAD] No translations for Non-English languages.
[OK] Builds in mock.
[OK] Should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures.
[BAD] Package functions as described: Not enough information for this.
[OK] Scriptlets seem to be sane.
[OK] No -devel subpackage, therefore no requirement for base package needed.
[OK] -utils subpackage is independent, therefore no requirement for base
package needed.
[OK] No pkgconfig files, therefore no placement needed.
[OK] No file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin.
--
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 485580] Review Request: netactview - Graphical network connections viewer for Linux
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=485580 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-26 10:35:14 EDT --- netactview-0.4.1-2.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 485580] Review Request: netactview - Graphical network connections viewer for Linux
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=485580 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|0.4.1-2.fc10|0.4.1-2.fc9 -- 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
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 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA --- Comment #27 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-26 10:35:40 EDT --- mydns-1.2.8.25-1.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update mydns'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F10/FEDORA-2009-2135 -- 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 485580] Review Request: netactview - Graphical network connections viewer for Linux
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=485580 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-26 10:32:31 EDT --- netactview-0.4.1-2.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 485580] Review Request: netactview - Graphical network connections viewer for Linux
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=485580 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||0.4.1-2.fc10 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 487527] New: Review Request: watchdog - Software and/or Hardware watchdog daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: watchdog - Software and/or Hardware watchdog daemon https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487527 Summary: Review Request: watchdog - Software and/or Hardware watchdog daemon Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: rjo...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/watchdog.spec SRPM URL: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/watchdog-5.5-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: Software and/or Hardware watchdog daemon rpmlint gives the following warnings, which I think are OK because these shell scripts ought to be executable: watchdog.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/watchdog-5.5/examples/repair.sh watchdog.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/watchdog-5.5/examples/uptime.sh watchdog.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/watchdog-5.5/examples/dbcheck.sh Koji scratch build in dist-f11: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1191591 -- 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
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 Blocks|177841 | -- 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 476315] Review Request: evolution-mapi - Exchange 2007 support for Evolution
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=476315 --- Comment #16 from Matthew Barnes mbar...@redhat.com 2009-02-26 11:01:45 EDT --- Got clarification from upstream that the correct license is LGPLv2+ and the COPYING file is apparently wrong (and so is my spec file). But there's also a COPYING.LGPL2 and COPYING.LGPL3 in the SVN repo which isn't included in the tarball. *confusion* Novell promised to clarify the license in the next release. So can we mark it as the -intended- license, and I'll make sure it gets fixed? The grep thing I must have copy-n-pasted from another package. It's gone now. http://mbarnes.fedorapeople.org/mapi/SPECS/evolution-mapi.spec http://mbarnes.fedorapeople.org/mapi/SRPMS/evolution-mapi-0.25.91-3.fc10.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 487535] New: Review Request: bltk - Baterry Life Tool Kit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: bltk - Baterry Life Tool Kit https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487535 Summary: Review Request: bltk - Baterry Life Tool Kit Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: jsk...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/jskala/bltk/devel/bltk.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/jskala/bltk/devel/bltk-1.0.8-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: I've just done packaging up bltk and I'd like ask for a review so that I can get it into Fedora Extras. The Battery Life Tool Kit is used to measure battery life and performance under different workloads on Linux. Test can be used with various workloads to simulate different types of laptop usage (idle, office, reader, player, developer, game). -- 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 487365] Review Request: eclipse-oprofile - Eclipse plugin for OProfile integration
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=487365
--- Comment #2 from Kent Sebastian kseba...@redhat.com 2009-02-26 11:09:15
EDT ---
Updated spec and srpm uploaded (same url).
X make sure lines are = 80 characters
- please add some line continuations to fix this
for some lines this introduces errors, eg:
%define corepath
%{buildroot}%{install_loc}/eclipse/plugins/org.eclipse.linuxtools.oprofile.core_%{ver_qual}
can not be split. For others (eg: very long paths) it seems to harm
readability, but other than that line continuations added where possible.
X summary and description good
- please add Eclipse somewhere in the Summary. Something like Eclipse
Fixed.
X rpmlint on this package.srpm gives no output
Fixed.
This is fine 'cause it needs to be there for correct use of pam/consolehelper,
right?
Indeed, they are not config files per-se, since there is no configuration to be
done by the user. Once placed there they never need to be touched.
--
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 486044] Review Request: php-pear-Config -Configuration file manipulation for PHP
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=486044 Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com 2009-02-26 11:37:38 EDT --- Two of the tests are badly written and fail. There is no problem with the functionality of the package. This should be reported upstream REVIEW: + rpmlint is ok php-pear-Config.src: I: checking php-pear-Config.noarch: I: checking 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. + package name + spec file name + package meet the PHP Guidelines (new update) + License ok : BSD + License is upstream + spec in english and legible + no license file in sources is provided + sources match the upstream sources ec85ece7ddd28a0a139c0699481c0116 Config-1.10.11.tgz + Source URL ok + build on F10.x86_64 + BuildRequires (php-pear = 1:1.4.9-1.2) ok + no locale + no .so + own all directories that it creates + no duplicate file + %defattr ok + %clean section + use macros consistently + contain code + small documentation + no devel + no pkgconfig + no sub-package + no GUI + don't own files or directories already owned by other packages + %install start with rm -rf + valid UTF-8 + build in mock (fedora-rawhide-x86_64) + test suite : see previous comment + scriptlets ok + Final Requires ok /bin/sh /usr/bin/pear php-pear(PEAR) php-pear(XML_Parser) php-pear(XML_Util) + Final Provides ok php-pear(Config) = 1.10.11 php-pear-Config = 1.10.11-2.fc8 php-pear(PEAR) should be removed from Requires as already required by php-pear(XML_Parser) and php-pear(XML_Util) 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 487365] Review Request: eclipse-oprofile - Eclipse plugin for OProfile integration
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=487365 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com 2009-02-26 11:39:06 EDT --- Thanks. I've verified that the rpmlint issues are gone and the line length stuff is fixed. My only remaining nit is the description: please include the CDT somehow and drop the powerful. Something like ... profiling capabilities with the CDT. Otherwise, we're good to go. -- 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 428568] Review Request: synfig - Synfig is a vector based 2D animation package
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=428568 --- Comment #31 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) kwiz...@gmail.com 2009-02-26 12:10:38 EDT --- any news ? -- 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 476315] Review Request: evolution-mapi - Exchange 2007 support for Evolution
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=476315 Matthias Clasen mcla...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #17 from Matthias Clasen mcla...@redhat.com 2009-02-26 12:25:29 EDT --- Novell promised to clarify the license in the next release. So can we mark it as the -intended- license, and I'll make sure it gets fixed? Sounds good enough to me. And ship no license file then, instead of the wrong license file, I guess. 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 486723] Review Request: webkit-sharp - .NET bindings for WebKit
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=486723
Paul Lange pala...@gmx.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Paul Lange pala...@gmx.de 2009-02-26 12:29:07 EDT ---
- MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted
in the review.
webkit-sharp.i386: E: no-binary
webkit-sharp.i386: E: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 0 warnings.
Errors can be ignored.
- MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines
OK
- MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the
format %{name}.spec
OK
- MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
OK
- MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines .
OK
- MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
OK
- MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package must be included in %doc.
OK
- MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
OK
- MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
OK
- MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no
upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.
OK
- MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
OK - i386
- 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.
OK
- MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
OK
- MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
OK
- MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a
%defattr(...) line.
OK
- MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
OK
- MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
OK
- MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
OK
- MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
OK
- MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'
(for directory ownership and usability).
OK
- MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release}
OK
- MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages. The rule of thumb here is that the first package to be installed
should own the files or directories that other packages may rely upon. This
means, for example, that no package in Fedora should ever share ownership with
any of the files or directories owned by the filesystem or man package. If you
feel that you have a good reason to own a file or directory that another
package owns, then please present that at package review time.
OK
- MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
OK
- MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
OK
Monodoc is excluded until we figured out how to handle docs right.
One thing I noticed it that version of the package is 0.2. But in mono/gac the
version of the assembly is 1.0.0.0. But I think this is an upstream issue.
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 428567] Review Request: ETL - Extended Template Library
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=428567 Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #72 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2009-02-26 12:35:19 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: ETL Short Description: Extended Template Library Owners: lkundrak (anyone who wants to comaintiain this, feel free to opt in) Branches: EL-5 F-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 487312] Review Request: tuned - A dynamic adaptive system tuning daemon
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=487312 Phil Knirsch pknir...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(pknir...@redhat.c | |om) | --- Comment #4 from Phil Knirsch pknir...@redhat.com 2009-02-26 12:43:19 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) MUST Items -- [OK] Named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [OK] The spec file name must match the base package. [FAIL/INFO] The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. FAIL: The description is not more than the summary. Please add some more information maybe on how it is working or how it should be used. INFO: There is a README and README.txt. What is the difference? Extended the description of both the main and the utils package to contain more useful information about the packages. Also renamed the README.txt to DESIGN.txt as it is a rough draft of the design of the tuned. SHOULD Items [OK] License file included. [BAD] No translations for Non-English languages. Will come in a future version. [BAD] Package functions as described: Not enough information for this. Extended the README and the tuned manpage, added a tuned.conf manpage and added a README.utils that describes in detail what the systemtap scripts do. Thanks a lot for the review so far! Regards, Phil New packages are now up: Spec URL: http://pknirsch.fedorapeople.org/src/tuned.spec SRPM URL: http://pknirsch.fedorapeople.org/src/tuned-0.1.2-1.fc10.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 484598] Review Request: grin - Grep-like tool for source code
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=484598 Terje Røsten terje...@phys.ntnu.no changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Terje Røsten terje...@phys.ntnu.no 2009-02-26 12:52:32 EDT --- Thanks Marcela! New Package CVS Request === Package Name: grin Short Description: Grep-like tool for source code 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 476315] Review Request: evolution-mapi - Exchange 2007 support for Evolution
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=476315 --- Comment #18 from Matthew Barnes mbar...@redhat.com 2009-02-26 12:59:36 EDT --- Thanks again for the reviews. -- 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 476315] Review Request: evolution-mapi - Exchange 2007 support for Evolution
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=476315 Matthew Barnes mbar...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #19 from Matthew Barnes mbar...@redhat.com 2009-02-26 13:00:49 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: evolution-mapi Short Description: Exchange 2007 support for Evolution Owners: mbarnes 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 486723] Review Request: webkit-sharp - .NET bindings for WebKit
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=486723 David Nielsen gnomeu...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from David Nielsen gnomeu...@gmail.com 2009-02-26 13:47:18 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: webkit-sharp Short Description: .NET bindings for WebKit Owners: dnielsen 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 487392] Review Request: crash-catcher - apps crash detecting daemon
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=487392 Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||awill...@redhat.com --- Comment #2 from Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com 2009-02-26 13:55:04 EDT --- Here's an updated .src.rpm with fixes for all issues identified by the review. The code fixes are implemented as a patch, which obviously the crash-catcher guys should apply to the code in trac rather than keeping as a patch. -- Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers -- 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 487392] Review Request: crash-catcher - apps crash detecting daemon
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=487392 --- Comment #3 from Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com 2009-02-26 13:55:43 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=68) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=68) Fixed crash-catcher package -- 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 487392] Review Request: crash-catcher - apps crash detecting daemon
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=487392 --- Comment #4 from Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com 2009-02-26 13:56:48 EDT --- Oh, except obviously I couldn't fix the tarball location as I'm not a crash-catcher developer :) You guys need to put a download section on the site and put the tarball there. -- 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 487392] Review Request: crash-catcher - apps crash detecting daemon
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=487392 --- Comment #5 from Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com 2009-02-26 14:06:42 EDT --- sorry, one more thing - remove 'autoreconf' from the spec once the patch is applied upstream, it's only needed while the patch is touching a Makefile.am. -- Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers -- 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
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 Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #28 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-02-26 14:35:04 EDT --- Now 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 484933] Review Request: libwps - Library for reading and converting Microsoft Works word processor documents
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=484933
--- Comment #15 from Simon Wesp cassmod...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-26
15:07:07 EDT ---
I'm very unhappy with it...
%files
%defattr(-,root,root,-)
%doc CHANGES COPYING CREDITS README
%{_libdir}/*.so.*
%files devel
%defattr(-,root,root,-)
%doc HACKING docs/doxygen/html
%{_includedir}/*
%{_libdir}/*.so
%{_libdir}/pkgconfig/%{name}*
%files tools
%defattr(-,root,root,-)
%{_bindir}/wps2*
this is imho shorter and easier.
--
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] Review Request: vidalia - QT-GUI for tor
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=484934 --- Comment #7 from Simon Wesp cassmod...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-26 15:12:04 EDT --- the package worksm, but the domain is incorrect. i will correct this in the next issue-killing session -- 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 479585] Review Request: megaupload-dl - Megaupload automatic downloader
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=479585 Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(mma...@redhat.com ||) --- Comment #25 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2009-02-26 15:13:26 EDT --- Marek, MegaUpload rapidly changes captchas these days, so this no longer works. And are you sure this is a build-time dependency: BuildRequires: tesseract Hint: It's not. And probably also this: BuildRequires: python-imaging -- 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 487365] Review Request: eclipse-oprofile - Eclipse plugin for OProfile integration
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=487365 --- Comment #4 from Kent Sebastian kseba...@redhat.com 2009-02-26 15:46:11 EDT --- My only remaining nit is the description: please include the CDT somehow and drop the powerful. Something like ... profiling capabilities with the CDT. 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 479585] Review Request: megaupload-dl - Megaupload automatic downloader
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=479585 Marek Mahut mma...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(mma...@redhat.com | |) | --- Comment #26 from Marek Mahut mma...@redhat.com 2009-02-26 15:48:48 EDT --- I know about the captcha, upstream is working on that, many users complains that it's not even human readable and I've bought a premium 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 487365] Review Request: eclipse-oprofile - Eclipse plugin for OProfile integration
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=487365 Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com 2009-02-26 15:50:34 EDT --- Thanks. This package is 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 487365] Review Request: eclipse-oprofile - Eclipse plugin for OProfile integration
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=487365 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com 2009-02-26 15:52:23 EDT --- Kent, please follow the procedure here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process which, as a next step has you follow this: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CVSAdminProcedure -- 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 479585] Review Request: megaupload-dl - Megaupload automatic downloader
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=479585 --- Comment #27 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2009-02-26 16:00:21 EDT --- Let's wait some time. [1] doesn't sound like upstream is working on that. Seriously, are they waiting for megaupload to replace captcha with a machine-readable one? Why would they do that? [1] http://code.google.com/p/plowshare/issues/detail?id=6 -- 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 487587] New: Review Request: debuginfofs - network-mountable filesystem for debuginfo
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: debuginfofs - network-mountable filesystem for debuginfo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487587 Summary: Review Request: debuginfofs - network-mountable filesystem for debuginfo Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: wwo...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: http://wwoods.fedorapeople.org/review/debuginfofs.spec SRPM URL: http://wwoods.fedorapeople.org/review/debuginfofs-0.1-0.fc10.src.rpm Description: debuginfofs is a network-mountable filesystem that provides the debugging symbols needed to generate a fully annotated backtrace. -- 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 486869] Review Request: flickrnet - A .NET library to interact with Flickr
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=486869 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-26 16:36:53 EDT --- flickrnet-2.1.5-1.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/flickrnet-2.1.5-1.fc10 -- 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 486869] Review Request: flickrnet - A .NET library to interact with Flickr
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=486869 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-26 16:39:04 EDT --- flickrnet-2.1.5-1.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/flickrnet-2.1.5-1.fc9 -- 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 487365] Review Request: eclipse-oprofile - Eclipse plugin for OProfile integration
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=487365 Kent Sebastian kseba...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #7 from Kent Sebastian kseba...@redhat.com 2009-02-26 16:41:33 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: eclipse-oprofile Short Description: Eclipse plugin for OProfile integration Owners: ksebasti Branches: F-10 InitialCC: overholt -- 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 486561] Review Request: monsoon - Monsoon is a Bittorrent client written in Mono and GTK#
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=486561 --- Comment #2 from Paul Lange pala...@gmx.de 2009-02-26 16:48:40 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=95) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=95) openSuse patch I found this patch in the openSuse package. Could you please investigate if we should include it too. -- 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 480859] Review Request: diffuse - graphical diff tool
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=480859 Jon Levell fed...@coralbark.net changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #14 from Jon Levell fed...@coralbark.net 2009-02-26 16:53:43 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: diffuse Short Description: Graphical tool for comparing and merging text files Owners: jonquark Branches: F-9 F-10 EL-5 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 486561] Review Request: monsoon - Monsoon is a Bittorrent client written in Mono and GTK#
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=486561 --- Comment #3 from David Nielsen gnomeu...@gmail.com 2009-02-26 17:00:02 EDT --- This is upstream and fixes a real bug (well actually it works around some Firefox strangeness) http://anonsvn.mono-project.com/viewvc/trunk/monsoon/Monsoon/TorrentController.cs?r1=125266r2=127458 As such I would be willing to carry it in the package, I will add it along with any review changes or at import time. It can go away with the next release so the workload is acceptable and the user experience is improved. -- 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 486561] Review Request: monsoon - Monsoon is a Bittorrent client written in Mono and GTK#
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=486561
Paul Lange pala...@gmx.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||pala...@gmx.de
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|pala...@gmx.de
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Paul Lange pala...@gmx.de 2009-02-26 17:20:11 EDT ---
- MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted
in the review.
monsoon.i386: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/monsoon-0.20/COPYING
monsoon.i386: E: no-binary
monsoon.i386: E: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
Errors can be ignored but please see if you cansolve the warning.
- MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines
OK
- MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the
format %{name}.spec
OK
- MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
OK
- MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines .
OK
- MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
OK
- MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package must be included in %doc.
OK
- MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
OK
- MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
OK
- MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no
upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.
OK - 1530450ee43d6103c063ea7d940854a9
- MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
OK - i386
- 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.
OK
- MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
OK
- MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
OK
- MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a
%defattr(...) line.
OK
- MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
OK
- MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
FAIL - use of %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
- MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
OK
- MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages. The rule of thumb here is that the first package to be installed
should own the files or directories that other packages may rely upon. This
means, for example, that no package in Fedora should ever share ownership with
any of the files or directories owned by the filesystem or man package. If you
feel that you have a good reason to own a file or directory that another
package owns, then please present that at package review time.
OK
- MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
OK
- MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
OK
Some things left before you can upload the package in CVS:
- Please correct the Url in URL field.
- Please use %{buildroot} consistently (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
- Please add the patch.
This are the only things left. I'm sure you going to correct this issues even
if I approve it now. So:
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 484560] Review Request: pydb - An expanded version of the Python debugger
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=484560 Jon Levell fed...@coralbark.net changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|fed...@coralbark.net Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #8 from Jon Levell fed...@coralbark.net 2009-02-26 17:17:42 EDT --- Ok... package 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 486561] Review Request: monsoon - Monsoon is a Bittorrent client written in Mono and GTK#
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=486561 David Nielsen gnomeu...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from David Nielsen gnomeu...@gmail.com 2009-02-26 17:30:18 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: monsoon Short Description: Monsoon is a Bittorrent client written in Mono and GTK# Owners: dnielsen 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 486657] Review Request: blahtexml - Converts TeX equations to MathML
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=486657 Jon Levell fed...@coralbark.net changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|fed...@coralbark.net Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #9 from Jon Levell fed...@coralbark.net 2009-02-26 17:37:29 EDT --- OK... the changes look good. I'll approve the package. I see that you need a sponsor. I've only just been sponsored myself but if you carry out a couple of package reviews: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines (or submit other packages for review) and link to them here then I'll sponsor you. (Michael who sponsored me is still cc'd to this bug so I suspect/hope he'll keep an eye out that I don't make any huge blunders) -- 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 467154] Review Request: libvirt-qpid - An interface with libvirt using QMF (qpid modeling framework) which utilizes the Advanced Message Queuing protocol
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=467154 --- Comment #11 from David Lutterkort lut...@redhat.com 2009-02-26 17:59:20 EDT --- APPROVED Please follow http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/CVSAdminProcedure and import the package. Close this bug as RAWHIDE once it's been successfully imported and built. SRPM/spec file at http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1193621 Minor nits: * the version for the last changelog entry is incorrect (makes rpmlint complain) * rather than using %defattr and %attr, fix the build process of libvirt-qpid to give files the correct permissions * since you're also upstream, please put up a page with downloads of official releases so that people can independently verify that the sources are really what they ought to be (would also be a good idea to tag releases in git for the morbidly curious) -- 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 226241] Merge Review: perl-Bit-Vector
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=226241 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED CC||cw...@alumni.drew.edu Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #4 from Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 2009-02-26 18:35:27 EDT --- Closing... -- 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 226242] Merge Review: perl-BSD-Resource
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=226242 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #5 from Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 2009-02-26 18:39:55 EDT --- Closing... (merge review with fedora-review+) -- 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 226260] Merge Review: perl-HTML-Parser
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=226260 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #6 from Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 2009-02-26 18:40:00 EDT --- Closing... (merge review with fedora-review+) -- 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 226261] Merge Review: perl-HTML-Tagset
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=226261 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #10 from Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 2009-02-26 18:40:01 EDT --- Closing... (merge review with fedora-review+) -- 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 226271] Merge Review: perl-Net-IP
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=226271 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #7 from Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 2009-02-26 18:40:08 EDT --- Closing... (merge review with fedora-review+) -- 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 226254] Merge Review: perl-Devel-Symdump
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=226254 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #4 from Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 2009-02-26 18:39:57 EDT --- Closing... (merge review with fedora-review+) -- 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 195420] Review Request: clips - Tools for developing expert systems
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=195420 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #23 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-02-26 19:04:23 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 487115] Review Request: perl-NOCpulse-Gritch - Perl throttled email notification for Spacewalk
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=487115 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #3 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-02-26 19:05:52 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 487263] Review request: preferences-menus - Categorized submenus for the Preferences menu
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=487263 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #6 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-02-26 19:09:39 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 480859] Review Request: diffuse - graphical diff tool
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=480859 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #15 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-02-26 19:12:28 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 464781] Review Request: flexdock - Java docking UI element. First package.
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=464781 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #37 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-02-26 19:14:02 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 486723] Review Request: webkit-sharp - .NET bindings for WebKit
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=486723 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #3 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-02-26 19:16:18 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 487365] Review Request: eclipse-oprofile - Eclipse plugin for OProfile integration
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=487365 --- Comment #8 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-02-26 19:19:34 EDT --- Kent: I don't see you in the packager group. Is this your first package? -- 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 484598] Review Request: grin - Grep-like tool for source code
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=484598 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #5 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-02-26 19:21:32 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 485007] Review Request: rhnpush - Package uploader for the RHN Satellite/Spacewalk Server
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=485007 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #12 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-02-26 19:20:42 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 486561] Review Request: monsoon - Monsoon is a Bittorrent client written in Mono and GTK#
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=486561 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #6 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-02-26 19:17:49 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 462521] Review Request: simplyhtml - Application and a java component for rich text processing
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=462521 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #17 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-02-26 19:22:45 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 428567] Review Request: ETL - Extended Template Library
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=428567 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #73 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-02-26 19:26:41 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 476315] Review Request: evolution-mapi - Exchange 2007 support for Evolution
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=476315 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #20 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-02-26 19:29:02 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 453395] Review Request: OpenChange - Microsoft Exchange access with native protocols
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=453395 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #28 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-02-26 19:29:59 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 453083] Review Request: Samba4 - Samba4 CIFS and AD server and client
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=453083 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #67 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-02-26 19:31:08 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 475823] Review Request: menu-cache - Caching mechanism for freedesktop.org compilant menus
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=475823 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #5 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-02-26 19:27:53 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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 486723] Review Request: webkit-sharp - .NET bindings for WebKit
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=486723 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-26 20:01:46 EDT --- webkit-sharp-0.2-1.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/webkit-sharp-0.2-1.fc9 -- 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 484202] Review Request: perl-Test-JSON - Test JSON data
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=484202 Allisson Azevedo allis...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added 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 486723] Review Request: webkit-sharp - .NET bindings for WebKit
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=486723 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-26 20:02:02 EDT --- webkit-sharp-0.2-1.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/webkit-sharp-0.2-1.fc10 -- 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 486723] Review Request: webkit-sharp - .NET bindings for WebKit
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=486723 David Nielsen gnomeu...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #6 from David Nielsen gnomeu...@gmail.com 2009-02-26 20:11:03 EDT --- webkit-sharp should be in the next rawhide update -- 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 487617] New: Review Request: perl-DateTime-Format-ISO8601 - Parses ISO8601 formats
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: perl-DateTime-Format-ISO8601 - Parses ISO8601 formats https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487617 Summary: Review Request: perl-DateTime-Format-ISO8601 - Parses ISO8601 formats Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/DateTime-Format-ISO8601 OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: cw...@alumni.drew.edu QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~cweyl/review/perl-DateTime-Format-ISO8601.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~cweyl/review/perl-DateTime-Format-ISO8601-0.06-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Parses almost all ISO8601 date and time formats. ISO8601 time-intervals will be supported in a later release. Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1199557 *rt-0.05 -- 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
