[Bug 244371] Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment
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=244371 Tomeu Vizoso [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #15 from Tomeu Vizoso [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-12 06:05:39 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: sugar New Branches: OLPC-4 Owners: mpg erikos tomeu -- 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 244371] Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment
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=244371 Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #16 from Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-12 11:55:45 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 244371] Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment
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=244371 Fabian Affolter [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] Blocks||462625 -- 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 244371] Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment
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=244371 Tomeu Vizoso [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 244371] Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment
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=244371 Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #14 from Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-05 17:57:33 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 244371] Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment
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=244371 Marco Pesenti Gritti [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #13 from Marco Pesenti Gritti [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-04 04:55:19 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: sugar New Branches: F-10 -- 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 244371] Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244371 Bug 244371 depends on bug 244389, which changed state. Bug 244389 Summary: Review Request: sugar-datastore - Sugar Datastore https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244389 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||RAWHIDE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 244371] Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244371 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 244371] Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244371 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-20 10:05 EST --- http://dev.laptop.org/~marco/sugar-0.65-0.1.20070620git0e4efae7ae.src.rpm http://dev.laptop.org/~marco/sugar.spec Fixed a bunch of rpmlint complaints. Remaining: E: sugar explicit-lib-dependency libxml2-python I don't get this one... W: sugar conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/dbus-1/system.d/NetworkManagerInfo.conf Should be fine. I think we want to replace this on upgrades. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 244371] Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244371 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-20 12:42 EST --- going through the checklist -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 244371] Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244371
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-20 13:44 EST ---
Sugar review
- MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted
in the review.
Ok
- 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 unless your package has an exemption on Package Naming
Guidelines.
Ok
- MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
Ok
- MUST: The package must be licensed with an open-source compatible
license and meet other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of
Packaging Guidelines.
Fix - should be GPL/LGPL
- 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. If the reviewer is
unable to read the spec file, it will be impossible to perform a review. Fedora
is not the place for entries into the Obfuscated Code Contest
(http://www.ioccc.org/).
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 with fixes - OLPC is upstream, RPM is canonical source for packaged code
(please put a comment at the top of the spec file and a note on where the git
tree resides)
- MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms
on at least one supported architecture.
Ok
- 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 needs to have a bug filed
in bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work
on that architecture. The bug number should then be placed in a comment, next to
the corresponding ExcludeArch line. New packages will not have bugzilla entries
during the review process, so they should put this description in the comment
until the package is approved, then file the bugzilla entry, and replace the
long explanation with the bug number. (Extras Only) The bug should be marked as
blocking one (or more) of the following bugs to simplify tracking such issues:
FE-ExcludeArch-x86, FE-ExcludeArch-x64, FE-ExcludeArch-ppc, FE-ExcludeArch-ppc64
Can not test as reviewer does not have access to other platforms.
- MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for
any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines; inclusion
of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
gtk2-devel must be added
- MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using
the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
Ok
- MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files (not
just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig
in %post and %postun. If the package has multiple subpackages with libraries,
each subpackage should also have a %post/%postun section that calls
/sbin/ldconfig. An example of the correct syntax for this is:
%post -p /sbin/ldconfig
%postun -p /sbin/ldconfig
Ok (No %{_libdir} libraries)
- MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must
state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker.
Ok (package not relocatable)
- MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not
create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does
create that directory. The exception to this are directories listed explicitly
in the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard
(http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html), as it is safe to assume that
those directories exist.
Ok
- MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files
listing.
Ok
- MUST: Permissions on files
[Bug 244371] Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244371 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-20 14:21 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: sugar Short Description: OLPC desktop environment Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Branches: OLPC-2 InitialCC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 244371] Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244371 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-20 14:52 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: sugar Short Description: OLPC desktop environment Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Branches: OLPC-2 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 244371] Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244371 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-20 19:36 EST --- CVS done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 244371] Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244371 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||244389 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 244371] Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244371 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||244373 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 244371] Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244371 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||244370 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 244371] Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244371 Bug 244371 depends on bug 244373, which changed state. Bug 244373 Summary: Review Request: sugar-presence-service - Sugar presence service https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244373 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||RAWHIDE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 244371] Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244371 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-19 19:06 EST --- Created an attachment (id=157428) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=157428action=view) Fixed up spec file - add a %%doc line with COPYING COPYING.LIB and README - fix up BR's - fix buildroot -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 244371] Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244371 Bug 244371 depends on bug 244370, which changed state. Bug 244370 Summary: Review Request: olpc-hardware-manager - OLPC hardware manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244370 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||RAWHIDE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 244371] Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244371 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-18 16:34 EST --- gstreamer-plugins-base built -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 244371] Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244371 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-15 06:28 EST --- The plan is to add this package to the olpc-2 branch. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 244371] Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244371 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-15 08:40 EST --- Taking a quick look at the BRs, it looks like all you need are pygtk2-devel, perl-XML-parser, gettext, nspr-devel, gstreamer-devel, and gstreamer-base-plugins-devel. The rest should get pulled in by those. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 244371] Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sugar - OLPC desktop environment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244371 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-15 18:53 EST --- marco, please add those and hold off building until I get gstreamer-base-plugins compiled into our repo -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
