https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2056210
--- Comment #2 from Neal Gompa ---
I've refreshed the package to address as many of those as I can:
Spec URL: https://ngompa.fedorapeople.org/for-review/perl-Lua-API.spec
SRPM URL:
https://ngompa.fedorapeople.org/for-review/perl-Lua-API-0.04-
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2110055
Carl George 🤠 changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Status|POST
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2086484
Carl George 🤠 changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version||neomutt-20220629-1.fc37
Resolut
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2124368
--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-336a857b70 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are a
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2124347
--- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-336a857b70 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are o
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2125852
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-336a857b70 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are o
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2124376
--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-336a857b70 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are o
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2121585
--- Comment #22 from Renich Bon Ciric ---
OK, that was a minor success! :D
I was able to generate the man pages. I can create a patch to either just build
the man pages and move them manually, or just do it the right way, tell
upstream about
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2121585
--- Comment #21 from Renich Bon Ciric ---
(In reply to Benson Muite from comment #20)
> Thanks for this useful package which will make video conferencing easier.
> Some of these are packaged. See for example:
> https://packages.fedoraproject.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073765
--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-eb67dbc863 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --re
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073765
--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-ffa3f360f0 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --re
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2091389
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|jwak...@redhat.com |nob...@fedoraproject.org
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120459
Fabio Alessandro Locati changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-review+
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073765
--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-cfd7a48810 has been pushed to the Fedora 37 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --re
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2088450
--- Comment #15 from Petr Menšík ---
As I wrote in direct message to Michal, please consider using
SupplementaryGroups=sysrepo or Group=sysrepo parameter in netopeer service
instead of adding root user permanently to that group. I haven't trie
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2127168
--- Comment #5 from Petr Menšík ---
A new package would become part of rawhide, upcoming Fedora 38. That has
proposed change [1] to use SPDX license identifiers. For Fedora 37 'LGPLv2+'
would be okay, but for rawhide, where those reviews targe
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2128851
Jerry James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version||snowball-2.2.0-4.fc38
Status|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2128851
--- Comment #10 from Jerry James ---
(In reply to Julien Enselme from comment #9)
> I'll gladly help yes. Do I need to take actions to retire
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-snowballstemmer on F38? This repo
> will become useless a
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2130953
Lokesh Mandvekar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DEFERRED
Status|NEW
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2131949
Gwyn Ciesla changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Gwyn
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2131949
--- Comment #2 from Dan Horák ---
I believe GPL-3.0-or-later AND Apache-2.0 is correct, the main code (*.cc, *.h)
is GPLv3+ (plus the *.mm file is also ASL 2.0), the bundled gumbo library
(gumbo-subtree) is ASL 2.0. The "random" licenses are f
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035958
--- Comment #12 from Gwyn Ciesla ---
SRPM:
https://fedorapeople.org/~limb/review/libchipcard/libchipcard-5.1.6-3.fc37.src.rpm
SPEC: https://fedorapeople.org/~limb/review/libchipcard/libchipcard.spec
Done.
--
You are receiving this mail bec
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035958
--- Comment #11 from Benson Muite ---
Please update the source url:
https://www.aquamaniac.de/rdm/attachments/download/382/libchipcard-5.1.6.tar.gz
Possibly the signature can be removed:
https://www.aquamaniac.de/rdm/attachments/download/381/
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035958
--- Comment #10 from Gwyn Ciesla ---
Indeed.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035958
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035958
--- Comment #9 from Benson Muite ---
It seems the keyring may take a while. Can proceed without it.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and compo
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2131949
Gwyn Ciesla changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Flags|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2131838
Dan Horák changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|d...@danny.cz
Status|NEW
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2132014
--- Comment #4 from Dan Horák ---
Oh, no :-) I will take something else then :-)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzill
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2132014
--- Comment #3 from Dan Horák ---
formal review is here, see the notes explaining OK* and BAD statuses below:
OK source files match upstream:
9fecacb362cc501faf87b89167fd8e859fd058f4 indi-1.9.8.tar.gz
OK package meets n
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2132014
Gwyn Ciesla changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2132014
Mattia Verga changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mattia.ve...@proton.me
--- Comment #1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2131949
Gwyn Ciesla changed:
What|Removed |Added
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2132014
Dan Horák changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Flags|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2122395
--- Comment #2 from Petr Menšík ---
Ah, tests are present, changing review status. I have missed them in spec
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are al
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2122395
Petr Menšík changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-review+
Assignee|nob...@
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1822847
--- Comment #15 from Benson Muite ---
Checking logs.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- Package installs properly.
Note: In
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2130496
Parag AN(पराग) changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #5 from P
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2132022
--- Comment #1 from Miro Hrončok ---
> BuildRequires: pytest
I'd use python3-pytest here, for consistency.
> BuildRequires: pre-commit
> BuildRequires: python3-mypy
Is it possible to test without those?
I see this BuildRequires poetr
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2132022
Miro Hrončok changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-review?
CC|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2132022
Bug ID: 2132022
Summary: Review Request: python-poetry-plugin-export - Poetry
plugin to export the dependencies to various formats
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Hardwar
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2132014
Gwyn Ciesla changed:
What|Removed |Added
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
B
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2132014
Bug ID: 2132014
Summary: Review Request: indi - INDI Core Library
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: Package Review
Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.or
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120661
--- Comment #10 from Nicola Sella ---
Thank you, Petr. Here are the updated links for specfile and srpm.
SPEC:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/rpmsoftwaremanagement/dnf5-src-fedora/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/04886055-dnf5/dnf5.s
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2124479
--- Comment #10 from serge_sans_paille ---
Thanks a lot for the review!
I've uploaded an updated spec file & the associated srpm to the same location:
https://sergesanspaille.fedorapeople.org/llvm-bolt-15.0.0-1.src.rpm
https://sergesanspaille
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2087143
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Kadlčík ---
Since this would be your first Fedora package, you will need to get
sponsored into the `packager' group before this package can be
accepted.
I would like to sponsor you.
That would make it my responsibil
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2087143
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Kadlčík ---
> Hope it looks fine! I'm a bit unsure, although I've tried to reread a
> couple of times the bundling naming indications, if the naming I
> choose sound reasonable, as there seem to be some freedom left f
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2131602
Till Hofmann changed:
What|Removed |Added
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
--- Commen
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073765
--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-eb67dbc863 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-eb67dbc863
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notifie
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073765
--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System ---
FEDORA-2022-cfd7a48810 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 37.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-cfd7a48810
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notifie
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2082886
Till Hofmann changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(thofmann@fedorapr |
|oject.org)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2130496
--- Comment #4 from vishalvvr ---
Updated
SPEC URL:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/vishalvvr/pbench-agent/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/04886029-python-pidfile/python-pidfile.spec
SRPM URL:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.or
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2124329
Kalev Lember changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Status|POST
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2124365
Bug 2124365 depends on bug 2124329, which changed state.
Bug 2124329 Summary: Review Request: rust-cssparser - Rust implementation of
CSS Syntax Level 3
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2124329
What|Removed
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1822847
--- Comment #14 from Akira TAGOH ---
(In reply to Benson Muite from comment #13)
> c) Consider naming the metapackage vl-gothic-fonts-all
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/FontsPolicy/
> #_assembling_different_family_
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2131949
Bug ID: 2131949
Summary: Review Request: pageedit - ePub visual XHTML editor
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Componen
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2130496
--- Comment #3 from Parag AN(पराग) ---
1) Add upstream LICENSE file as
Source1:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/mosquito/python-pidfile/master/LICENSE in
SPEC
and in %prep
cp -p %{SOURCE1} .
and in %files
%license LICENSE
2) For %check if
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2121585
--- Comment #20 from Benson Muite ---
Thanks for this useful package which will make video conferencing easier. Some
of these are packaged. See for example:
https://packages.fedoraproject.org/pkgs/js-jquery/js-jquery/
bootswatch, bootstrap a
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2119983
Simone Caronni changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||needinfo?(jonathan@almalinu
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2127693
--- Comment #8 from Benson Muite ---
Thanks. Going with current practice for the fonts seems ok, there are efforts
to automate this. Checking the package again.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes
59 matches
Mail list logo