[Bug 800930] Review Request: redeclipse - Multiplayer FPS game based on Cube2
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=800930
--- Comment #29 from Martin Erik Werner martinerikwer...@gmail.com 2012-03-13
02:22:58 EDT ---
- 1.2-5
- Add Icon Cache scriptlet snippet
- Add BuildArch: noarch for -data subpackage
- Use %%{version} for Source0 and version in gen-tarball comment
spec URL: http://arand.fedorapeople.org/9/redeclipse.spec
--
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.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 797330] Review request: xsensors - An X11 interface to lm_sensors
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=797330 --- Comment #6 from Cédric OLIVIER cedric.oliv...@free.fr 2012-03-13 02:22:01 EDT --- If this is only the debian project that keeps this project for a long time, it might well be asking them to formally regain control of xsensors. Packaging a death project is for me a problem. Usually every patch must be submitted to upstream. For me if debian isn't upstream for this project, they can't change copying file. Licence choice is made by upstream and nobody can alter its content, even to update a link. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 785416] Review Request: python-xappy - A Python module providing an easy-to-use layer on top of the Xapian search engine
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=785416 Haïkel Guémar karlthe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|karlthe...@gmail.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 785416] Review Request: python-xappy - A Python module providing an easy-to-use layer on top of the Xapian search engine
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=785416 --- Comment #1 from Haïkel Guémar karlthe...@gmail.com 2012-03-13 02:44:24 EDT --- I will review this 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 785416] Review Request: python-xappy - A Python module providing an easy-to-use layer on top of the Xapian search engine
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=785416 Haïkel Guémar karlthe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 785416] Review Request: python-xappy - A Python module providing an easy-to-use layer on top of the Xapian search engine
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=785416 Haïkel Guémar karlthe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 795457] Review Request: jbossws-api - JBossWS API
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=795457 Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|652183(FE-JAVASIG) | Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com 2012-03-13 02:55:07 EDT --- Thanks for review! New Package SCM Request === Package Name: jbossws-api Short Description: JBossWS API Owners:goldmann Branches: f17 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 730232] Review Request: jboss-servlet-3.0-api - Java Servlet 3.0 API
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=730232 Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|652183(FE-JAVASIG) | Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #10 from Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com 2012-03-13 03:10:57 EDT --- Thanks for review! New Package SCM Request === Package Name: jboss-servlet-3.0-api Short Description: Java Servlet 3.0 API Owners:goldmann Branches: f17 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 785416] Review Request: python-xappy - A Python module providing an easy-to-use layer on top of the Xapian search engine
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=785416 --- Comment #2 from Haïkel Guémar karlthe...@gmail.com 2012-03-13 03:16:15 EDT --- Few fixes before formal review starts: * there's a typo in the license * Summary is way too long (e.g: A python high-level wrapper to Xapian search engine) * missing requires: xapian-bindings-python * you should remove the shebang line from the files in xappy.cachemanager, not required for executing modules as scripts. * if you generated the tarball manually, please add a comment explaining how it was generated and add the license file (upstream latest tarball does at least) * if you plan not to support EPEL5, please remove the buildroot tag, the buildroot manual cleaning and the defattr macros. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 758734] Review Request: fatrat-subtitlesearch - FatRat plugin enabling OpenSubtitles.org and Sublight.si 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=758734 Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(volke...@gmx.at) | --- Comment #6 from Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at 2012-03-13 03:38:27 EDT --- I'd take it, but it could take a few days. If you don't mind that, I'm fine. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787020] Review Request: trafficserver - Apache Traffic 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=787020 --- Comment #14 from Jan-Frode Myklebust janfr...@tanso.net 2012-03-13 03:45:46 EDT --- Yongming, the build fails on ppc64 with the message #error unsupported processor: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=3884843name=build.log is this something that can be 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 769919] Review Request: hydra - Very fast network log-on cracker
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=769919 --- Comment #14 from Athmane Madjoudj athma...@gmail.com 2012-03-13 04:35:28 EDT --- (In reply to comment #13) Yes, it fails, if mysql-devel is installed. Can you solve that? That error appears because 'hash_password' and 'scramble' are defined in the headers but not exposed by libmysql. I have a workaround for that issue, just testing it. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787020] Review Request: trafficserver - Apache Traffic 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=787020 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |MODIFIED -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787020] Review Request: trafficserver - Apache Traffic 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=787020 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-13 04:42:33 EDT --- trafficserver-3.0.3-2.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/trafficserver-3.0.3-2.el6 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 790805] Review Request: lcg-util - Command line tools for wlcg data management
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=790805 --- Comment #5 from adev ade...@gmail.com 2012-03-13 05:04:13 EDT --- comments about SWIG : It can compile without problem on rawhide, it is not the required version of SWIG but the minimum requirement in fact. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 802443] Review Request: perl-Language-Prolog-Yaswi - Yet another interface to SWI-Prolog
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=802443 --- Comment #3 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 2012-03-13 05:09:12 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-Language-Prolog-Yaswi Short Description: Yet another interface to SWI-Prolog Owners: ppisar mmaslano psabata Branches: f16 f17 InitialCC: perl-sig -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 802443] Review Request: perl-Language-Prolog-Yaswi - Yet another interface to SWI-Prolog
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=802443 --- Comment #2 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 2012-03-13 05:07:45 EDT --- TODO: Language::Prolog::Types::overload is used in tests but not buildrequired. I'll do. TIP: You've enabled optional Pod test in Sugar, why not here (and in Types)? Because optional tests do not run by default here and in Types. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 802443] Review Request: perl-Language-Prolog-Yaswi - Yet another interface to SWI-Prolog
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=802443 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 801003] Review Request: slf4j-jboss-logmanager - SLF4J backend for JBoss LogManager
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=801003 --- Comment #3 from Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com 2012-03-13 05:28:43 EDT --- Ping? -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 772432] Review Request: gnome-applet-sensors - GNOME panel applet for hardware sensors
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=772432 --- Comment #8 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com 2012-03-13 05:30:40 EDT --- BTW I would be happy to help comaintain this package if it helps. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798616] Review Request: jboss-ejb3-ext-api - JBoss EJB 3 Extension API
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=798616 --- Comment #7 from Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com 2012-03-13 05:28:36 EDT --- Ping? -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 758734] Review Request: fatrat-subtitlesearch - FatRat plugin enabling OpenSubtitles.org and Sublight.si 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=758734 --- Comment #7 from Jan Vcelak jvce...@redhat.com 2012-03-13 05:40:23 EDT --- No problem. Take your time. 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 772432] Review Request: gnome-applet-sensors - GNOME panel applet for hardware sensors
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=772432 --- Comment #9 from Robert Scheck redhat-bugzi...@linuxnetz.de 2012-03-13 05:53:45 EDT --- Jens, I would say: Go for it. I only tried to be helpful by starting re-review request for gnome-applet-sensors, but I'm lacking time to continue that. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 795801] Review Request: paranamer - Library for accessing non-private methods at runtime
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=795801 Juan Hernández juan.hernan...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||juan.hernan...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|juan.hernan...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #3 from Juan Hernández juan.hernan...@redhat.com 2012-03-13 06:02:57 EDT --- I am taking this for 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 790805] Review Request: lcg-util - Command line tools for wlcg data management
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=790805 --- Comment #6 from adev ade...@gmail.com 2012-03-13 06:29:03 EDT --- Updated again Spec URL: http://firwen.org/home/specs/lcg-util.spec SRPM URL: http://firwen.org/home/specs/lcg-util-1.12.0-3.el5.centos.src.rpm Description: The LCG Utilities package is the main end user command line tool for data management provided by LCG. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 801092] Review Request: sumwars - a hack and slash role playing game
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=801092 --- Comment #6 from Martin Erik Werner martinerikwer...@gmail.com 2012-03-13 06:35:29 EDT --- Whoops, sorry I glossed over your comment about the desktop file when writing my review comments before. But still, it might make sense to use the upstream versions, since if translations etc. are incorporated there it would allow fedora to easily incorporate them.. I'm not sure about this, but I don't think the TryExec: is really necessary, since the only thing it will do is hide the entry unless it finds this file, I think it might be worth removing, and that plus only using 'sumwars' as the Exec: would make the desktop file non-path-dependent and cross-distro... You might want to suggest this to upstream to allow them to install the desktop file in the install phase? -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798998] Review Request: libcdr - a library for import of Corel Draw drawings
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=798998 --- Comment #4 from David Tardon dtar...@redhat.com 2012-03-13 06:41:14 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) Thanks. Meanwhile, I've had a look at things other than just the spec file: * The licensing is not clear yet. Spec says: I am looking into it. * I assume you are aware of these few items which are not needed in spec files anymore: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_Permissions https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#.25clean Yes, I am. The last time I tried to make a package without them rpmlint issued warnings about it, so I just put them back and have not tried to do it ever again. If rmplint has been fixed in the meanwhile, fine, I will remove them eventually. * There's an old packaging trick to ship subpackage documentation in the subpackage's own versioned docdir. I do not care either way... -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 771252] Review Request: cinnamon - Window management and application launching for GNOME
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=771252 --- Comment #32 from Christoph Wickert cwick...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-13 06:41:25 EDT --- (In reply to comment #30) I've filed bugs reports at gnome.org that never received any attention from the developers. But you don't happen to maintain any of the programs you filed bugs against, do you? Ubuntu will release gnome 3.4 before fedora 17 (4-6 weeks), hopefully this should be enough time for mint devs to correct some minor issues to cinnamon-settings I doubt that this will be enough time. Mint 12 was released 6 weeks after Ubuntu 11:10. Given this delay Fedora 17 will either be frozen or even released. While the Mint developers are free to delay their release, Fedora has a tight schedule *and* happens to be *the* GNOME upstream distribution. We have the maintainers of GNOME and GTK and none of them will wait for you to fix Cinnamon. I wish you good luck with your effort! they have also incorporated alacarte into cinnamon That is a dirty hack, see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=734442 (In reply to comment #31) There are valid concerns with any forks surrounding maintenance etc but that is not part of the package review process. Quote from http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process The purpose of this formal review is to try to ensure that the package meets the quality control requirements for Fedora. This does not mean that the package (or the software being packaged) is perfect, but it should meet baseline minimum requirements for quality. Anyway, I don't want to prevent cinnamon from getting into Fedora or delay the process. I just want to express my concerns and wish all of you good luck. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 795801] Review Request: paranamer - Library for accessing non-private methods at runtime
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=795801
--- Comment #4 from Juan Hernández juan.hernan...@redhat.com 2012-03-13
06:50:13 EDT ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[!] Rpmlint output:
Source package:
$ rpmlint paranamer-2.2-2.fc17.src.rpm
paranamer.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) runtime - run time, run-time,
rudiment
paranamer.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US runtime - run time,
run-time, rudiment
paranamer.src: W: invalid-url Source0: paranamer-2.2-CLEAN.tar.xz
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings
Binary packages built in Koji:
$ rpmlint paranamer-2.2-2.fc18.noarch.rpm
paranamer-javadoc-2.2-2.fc18.noarch.rpm
paranamer.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) runtime - run time,
run-time, rudiment
paranamer.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US runtime - run time,
run-time, rudiment
paranamer.noarch: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/share/doc/paranamer-2.2/LICENSE.txt
paranamer-javadoc.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Javadocs - Java
docs, Java-docs, Avocados
paranamer-javadoc.noarch: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/share/doc/paranamer-javadoc-2.2/LICENSE.txt
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings.
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1].
[x] Spec file name must match the base package name, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[!] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines[2].
Summary is not accurate (see issues below).
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms.
[x] Buildroot definition is not present
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines[3,4].
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: BSD
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] All independent sub-packages have license of their own
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
MD5SUM this package: 2635b2776976757131eb9eb295d7d8c7
MD5SUM upstream package: 1092a9f7308f427c0481b3cfff72bfec
Compared the sources this package sources and upstream sources from upstream
with diff and there are no differences:
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines[5].
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates or must require other
packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] File sections do not contain %defattr(-,root,root,-) unless changed with
good reason
[!] Permissions on files are set properly.
See rpmlint of binary packages.
[x] Package does NOT have a %clean section which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). (not needed anymore)
[x] Package consistently uses macros (no %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
mixing)
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[-] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x] Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
subpackage
[x] Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlinks)
[x] Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
[x] Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils
[x] Package uses %global not %define
[x] If package uses tarball from VCS include comment how to re-create that
tarball (svn export URL, git clone URL, ...)
[x] If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be
removed prior to building
[x] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[x] Jar files are installed to %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar (see [6] for details)
[x] If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when
building with ant
[x] pom files has correct add_maven_depmap
=== Maven ===
[x] Use %{_mavenpomdir} macro for placing pom files instead of
%{_datadir}/maven2/poms
[x] If package uses -Dmaven.test.skip=true explain why it was needed in a
comment
[-] If package uses custom depmap -Dmaven.local.depmap.file=* explain why
it's needed in a comment
[x] Package DOES NOT use %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[x] Packages DOES NOT have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on
jpackage-utils for %update_maven_depmap macro
=== Other suggestions ===
[x] If possible use upstream build method (maven/ant/javac)
[x] Avoid having BuildRequires on exact
[Bug 798654] Review Request: cmpi-bindings - CMPI-compliant provider interface for various languages via SWIG
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=798654 Vitezslav Crhonek vcrho...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2012-03-13 06:59:44 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 771252] Review Request: cinnamon - Window management and application launching for GNOME
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=771252 --- Comment #33 from Tim Lauridsen t...@rasmil.dk 2012-03-13 07:00:59 EDT --- I have been using leigh's cinnamon packages for a while on F16 and have not had any issues at all, I wish i could say the same thing about gnome-shell. Leigh, I would like help out co-maintaining (fasname = timlau) -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 799976] Review Request: hibernate-validator - Bean Validation (JSR 303) Reference Implementation
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=799976 --- Comment #3 from Juan Hernández juan.hernan...@redhat.com 2012-03-13 07:13:28 EDT --- You are right Andy, there were issues in the dependencies in maven-jaxb2-plugin and glassfish-jaxb, but not in hibernate-validator itself. I have fixed both and the package builds correctly now in Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3888605 Sorry for the inconveniences. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 795801] Review Request: paranamer - Library for accessing non-private method parameter names at run-time
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=795801 Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: paranamer - |Review Request: paranamer - |Library for accessing |Library for accessing |non-private methods at |non-private method |runtime |parameter names at run-time --- Comment #5 from Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com 2012-03-13 07:44:54 EDT --- I missed the git repo as the project website is outdated and informs only about SVN, nice catch! #2, #3, #4 - fixed Spec URL: http://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/package_review/paranamer/3/paranamer.spec SRPM URL: http://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/package_review/paranamer/3/paranamer-2.4.1-1.fc17.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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 771252] Review Request: cinnamon - Window management and application launching for GNOME
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=771252 --- Comment #34 from leigh scott leigh123li...@googlemail.com 2012-03-13 08:00:53 EDT --- (In reply to comment #33) I have been using leigh's cinnamon packages for a while on F16 and have not had any issues at all, I wish i could say the same thing about gnome-shell. Leigh, I would like help out co-maintaining (fasname = timlau) Hi Tim, I will add you to the acls as soon as it's approved. Here's my initial attempt for a working f17 package http://leigh123linux.fedorapeople.org/pub/srpm/cinnamon-1.3.1-15.fc17.src.rpm Patch 2 (logout_theme.patch) will need to dropped as it masks the hibernate and suspend options. https://github.com/linuxmint/Cinnamon/issues/175 https://github.com/rat4/Cinnamon/commit/7b5583f4ad46c377beb5802593dd35f68358 The srpm is also versioned wrong, it's a snapshot from 4-5 days ago (I was to lazy to change it in the spec). The latest f17 muffin package also has broken deps (missing libcogl.so.9 which hasn't been pushed yet) due to earlier build failures and now this cogl override. https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=306366 Thanks Leigh -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 795801] Review Request: paranamer - Library for accessing non-private method parameter names at run-time
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=795801
Juan Hernández juan.hernan...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #6 from Juan Hernández juan.hernan...@redhat.com 2012-03-13
08:03:24 EDT ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[!] Rpmlint output:
Source package:
$ rpmlint paranamer-2.4.1-1.fc17.src.rpm
paranamer.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US runtime - run time,
run-time, rudiment
paranamer.src: W: invalid-url Source0: paranamer-2.4.1-CLEAN.tar.xz
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
Binary packages built in Koji:
$ rpmlint paranamer-2.4.1-1.fc18.noarch.rpm
paranamer-javadoc-2.4.1-1.fc18.noarch.rpm
paranamer.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US runtime - run time,
run-time, rudiment
paranamer-javadoc.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Javadocs - Java
docs, Java-docs, Avocados
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1].
[x] Spec file name must match the base package name, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines[2].
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms.
[x] Buildroot definition is not present
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines[3,4].
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: BSD
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] All independent sub-packages have license of their own
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
MD5SUM this package: f3728b5979cbbec75caddc28f63c924b
MD5SUM upstream package: 0f2e09975e997aad8cb46a0d9c7086e9
Compared this package sources and upstream sources with diff and there are no
differences.
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines[5].
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates or must require other
packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] File sections do not contain %defattr(-,root,root,-) unless changed with
good reason
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package does NOT have a %clean section which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). (not needed anymore)
[x] Package consistently uses macros (no %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
mixing)
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[-] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x] Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
subpackage
[x] Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlinks)
[x] Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
[x] Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils
[x] Package uses %global not %define
[x] If package uses tarball from VCS include comment how to re-create that
tarball (svn export URL, git clone URL, ...)
[x] If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be
removed prior to building
[x] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[x] Jar files are installed to %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar (see [6] for details)
[x] If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when
building with ant
[x] pom files has correct add_maven_depmap
=== Maven ===
[x] Use %{_mavenpomdir} macro for placing pom files instead of
%{_datadir}/maven2/poms
[x] If package uses -Dmaven.test.skip=true explain why it was needed in a
comment
[-] If package uses custom depmap -Dmaven.local.depmap.file=* explain why
it's needed in a comment
[x] Package DOES NOT use %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[x] Packages DOES NOT have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on
jpackage-utils for %update_maven_depmap macro
=== Other suggestions ===
[x] If possible use upstream build method (maven/ant/javac)
[x] Avoid having BuildRequires on exact NVR unless necessary
[x] Package has BuildArch: noarch (if possible)
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on:
[Bug 801092] Review Request: sumwars - a hack and slash role playing game
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=801092 --- Comment #7 from Martin Erik Werner martinerikwer...@gmail.com 2012-03-13 08:09:12 EDT --- Ah, and as per http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Desktop_files you should not use the --vendor option unless it's an existing package which already use it. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 225749] Merge Review: fetchmail
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=225749 Vitezslav Crhonek vcrho...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(vcrhonek@redhat.c | |om) | --- Comment #4 from Vitezslav Crhonek vcrho...@redhat.com 2012-03-13 08:06:24 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) What's the status of fetchmailconf? When looking through koji builds it seems it was not built for a long time. Is Obsolete tag still required? Is fetchmailconf section still required? - Looks good, but please explain fetchmailconf status fetchmailconf is obsolete since 2005, I removed it in fetchmail-6.3.21-3.fc18. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 795801] Review Request: paranamer - Library for accessing non-private method parameter names at run-time
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=795801 Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|652183(FE-JAVASIG) | Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #7 from Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com 2012-03-13 08:13:16 EDT --- Thanks for review! New Package SCM Request === Package Name: paranamer Short Description: Library for accessing non-private method parameter names at run-time Owners:goldmann Branches: f17 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798438] Review Request: uthash-devel - Hash table and linked list for C structures
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=798438 --- Comment #7 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com 2012-03-13 08:21:15 EDT --- * The License tag BSD is okay now. * The empty %build section belongs _before_ %install not after it. * The empty %clean section may be removed completely. It makes no sense to keep it, since the default is sufficient. * Closer reading of the %description reveals this unclear sentence: | It is a development package without a source or binary package as | there are only header files. without a source or binary package - How is that meant to be understood? A source package commonly is the src.rpm package. A binary package is the build, no matter whether noarch or arch-specific. Before that, the description already explains that it is a C preprocessor implementation. In case that needs further explanation, you could write: There is no shared library for uthash, just C header files. * Several items mentioned in comment 2 are not okay yet. Would you mind checking your own package against the https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines page? For example, here a few items that must be dealt with: MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build produces. The output should be posted in the review. MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines . 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. MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with executable permissions, for example. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#FilePermissions * With regard to MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package, strictly speaking, this header-only package (that doesn't build a shared library) would need to adhere to the Static Library Packaging guidelines and provide a virtual -static subpackage Provides. In case of a security vulnerability, for example, one would need to query for all packages that BuildRequires uthash-static and rebuild them. However, header-only packages are somewhat of a grey area and are not covered by the guidelines yet. One would need to query for BuildRequires uthash-devel instead, which could be a little bit confusing. Hence my proposal is: Add an important note at the top of the spec file, explaining that uthash-devel is a special header-only package, and any packages that build with it may need special treatment for crucial fixes in uthash. * With regard to the package naming guidelines and comment 2, it is still confusing why you introduce the uthash-dev namespace for the documentation of a package that is called uthash-devel. Do you disagree with the hint in comment 2? Once you would follow the licensing guidelines (one of the MUST items above), you would introduce a second doc directory anyway. You'll see. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 802758] New: Review Request: drupal6-drush - cli for drupal management
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: drupal6-drush - cli for drupal management https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=802758 Summary: Review Request: drupal6-drush - cli for drupal management Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ansi...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Spec URL: http://r-bean2.rhcloud.com/drupal6-drush.spec SRPM URL: http://r-bean2.rhcloud.com/drupal6-drush-4.1-2.el6_2.src.rpm Description: Drush is a command line shell and scripting interface for Drupal, a veritable Swiss Army knife designed to make life easier for those of us who spend some of our working hours hacking away at the command prompt. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 730232] Review Request: jboss-servlet-3.0-api - Java Servlet 3.0 API
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=730232 --- Comment #11 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-03-13 09:01:21 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 802761] New: Review Request: drupal6-geshifilter - geshifilter module for drupal6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: drupal6-geshifilter - geshifilter module for drupal6 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=802761 Summary: Review Request: drupal6-geshifilter - geshifilter module for drupal6 Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ansi...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Spec URL: http://r-bean2.rhcloud.com/drupal6-geshifilter.spec SRPM URL: http://r-bean2.rhcloud.com/drupal6-geshifilter-1.4-4.fc16.src.rpm Description: The GeShi Filter module provides a filter for source code syntax highlighting for a wide range of languages. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 795457] Review Request: jbossws-api - JBossWS API
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=795457 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-03-13 09:02:33 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 802443] Review Request: perl-Language-Prolog-Yaswi - Yet another interface to SWI-Prolog
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=802443 --- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-03-13 09:08:14 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 795801] Review Request: paranamer - Library for accessing non-private method parameter names at run-time
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=795801 --- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-03-13 09:07:48 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 802758] Review Request: drupal6-drush - cli for drupal management
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=802758 --- Comment #1 from Anderson Silva ansi...@redhat.com 2012-03-13 09:25:28 EDT --- As a side note this spec was built using the fedora drupal template found at: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Drupal_module_specfile_template -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 802761] Review Request: drupal6-geshifilter - geshifilter module for drupal6
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=802761 --- Comment #1 from Anderson Silva ansi...@redhat.com 2012-03-13 09:25:55 EDT --- As a side note this spec was built using the fedora drupal template found at: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Drupal_module_specfile_template -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 769919] Review Request: hydra - Very fast network log-on cracker
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=769919 --- Comment #15 from Athmane Madjoudj athma...@gmail.com 2012-03-13 09:24:57 EDT --- - Fixed compilation warnings (important one). - Added mysql support (I need to investigate more on this because it does not seem to find a valid user/pass against mysql server 5.5.x) SPEC: http://athmane.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/hydra.spec SRPM: http://athmane.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/hydra-7.2-5.fc16.src.rpm Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=342 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 802443] Review Request: perl-Language-Prolog-Yaswi - Yet another interface to SWI-Prolog
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=802443 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED Fixed In Version||perl-Language-Prolog-Yaswi- ||0.19-1.fc18 --- Comment #5 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 2012-03-13 09:36:37 EDT --- Thank you for the review and repository. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 730232] Review Request: jboss-servlet-3.0-api - Java Servlet 3.0 API
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=730232 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-13 09:39:59 EDT --- jboss-servlet-3.0-api-1.0.1-0.1.20120312gitd4b6f2.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/jboss-servlet-3.0-api-1.0.1-0.1.20120312gitd4b6f2.fc17 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 730232] Review Request: jboss-servlet-3.0-api - Java Servlet 3.0 API
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=730232 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 795457] Review Request: jbossws-api - JBossWS API
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=795457 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 795457] Review Request: jbossws-api - JBossWS API
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=795457 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-13 09:42:05 EDT --- jbossws-api-1.0.0-1.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/jbossws-api-1.0.0-1.fc17 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 795801] Review Request: paranamer - Library for accessing non-private method parameter names at run-time
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=795801 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 802443] Review Request: perl-Language-Prolog-Yaswi - Yet another interface to SWI-Prolog
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=802443 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-13 09:45:28 EDT --- perl-Language-Prolog-Types-0.10-1.fc16, perl-Language-Prolog-Yaswi-0.19-1.fc16, perl-Language-Prolog-Sugar-0.06-1.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Language-Prolog-Yaswi-0.19-1.fc16,perl-Language-Prolog-Sugar-0.06-1.fc16,perl-Language-Prolog-Types-0.10-1.fc16 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 802388] Review Request: perl-Language-Prolog-Sugar - Syntactic sugar for Prolog term constructors
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=802388 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-13 09:45:23 EDT --- perl-Language-Prolog-Types-0.10-1.fc16, perl-Language-Prolog-Yaswi-0.19-1.fc16, perl-Language-Prolog-Sugar-0.06-1.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Language-Prolog-Yaswi-0.19-1.fc16,perl-Language-Prolog-Sugar-0.06-1.fc16,perl-Language-Prolog-Types-0.10-1.fc16 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 795801] Review Request: paranamer - Library for accessing non-private method parameter names at run-time
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=795801 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-13 09:43:24 EDT --- paranamer-2.4.1-1.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/paranamer-2.4.1-1.fc17 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 802443] Review Request: perl-Language-Prolog-Yaswi - Yet another interface to SWI-Prolog
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=802443 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-13 09:42:39 EDT --- perl-Language-Prolog-Types-0.10-1.fc17, perl-Language-Prolog-Yaswi-0.19-1.fc17, perl-Language-Prolog-Sugar-0.06-1.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-3608/perl-Language-Prolog-Yaswi-0.19-1.fc17,perl-Language-Prolog-Sugar-0.06-1.fc17,perl-Language-Prolog-Types-0.10-1.fc17 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 802388] Review Request: perl-Language-Prolog-Sugar - Syntactic sugar for Prolog term constructors
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=802388 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-13 09:42:33 EDT --- perl-Language-Prolog-Types-0.10-1.fc17, perl-Language-Prolog-Yaswi-0.19-1.fc17, perl-Language-Prolog-Sugar-0.06-1.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-3608/perl-Language-Prolog-Yaswi-0.19-1.fc17,perl-Language-Prolog-Sugar-0.06-1.fc17,perl-Language-Prolog-Types-0.10-1.fc17 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 771252] Review Request: cinnamon - Window management and application launching for GNOME
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=771252 --- Comment #35 from Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com 2012-03-13 09:42:31 EDT --- @Christoph Wickert, The quote doesn't mean what you think it does. We don't do code review as part of the review process clearly and there is no real history of even checking for functionality. If you want this to change, that is a reasonable position but any claim otherwise is overreaching. The checklist for instance focuses only on packaging policy. The worst that could happen is that the package gets abandoned after a while but that isn't a real problem. It happens routinely anyway. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 769919] Review Request: hydra - Very fast network log-on cracker
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=769919 --- Comment #16 from Athmane Madjoudj athma...@gmail.com 2012-03-13 09:46:46 EDT --- (In reply to comment #15) (I need to investigate more on this because it does not seem to find a valid user/pass against mysql server 5.5.x) Nevermind, I had the same issue with a package from other distro (it's an issue with hydra-mysql itself). -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 801003] Review Request: slf4j-jboss-logmanager - SLF4J backend for JBoss LogManager
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=801003 Asaf Shakarchi a...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Asaf Shakarchi a...@redhat.com 2012-03-13 10:08:53 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: slf4j-jboss-logmanager Short Description: SLF4J backend for JBoss LogManager Owners: asaf Branches: f17 InitialCC: goldmann -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 801003] Review Request: slf4j-jboss-logmanager - SLF4J backend for JBoss LogManager
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=801003 --- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-03-13 10:19:05 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 226252] Merge Review: perl-DBD-Pg
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=226252 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ppi...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 2012-03-13 10:19:40 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: perl-DBD-Pg Branches: f15 f16 f17 Owners: InitialCC: perl-sig Please add perl-sig user with watch* permissions only to all Fedora branches. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 226252] Merge Review: perl-DBD-Pg
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=226252 --- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-03-13 10:39:43 EDT --- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 225749] Merge Review: fetchmail
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=225749 Michal Hlavinka mhlav...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ Last Closed||2012-03-13 10:41:50 --- Comment #5 from Michal Hlavinka mhlav...@redhat.com 2012-03-13 10:41:50 EDT --- verified, everything looks ok now -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 799976] Review Request: hibernate-validator - Bean Validation (JSR 303) Reference Implementation
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=799976
Andy Grimm agr...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Andy Grimm agr...@gmail.com 2012-03-13 11:20:19 EDT ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Rpmlint output:
hibernate-validator.noarch: W: invalid-url URL:
http://www.hibernate.org/subprojects/validator.html HTTP Error 403: Forbidden
hibernate-validator.src: W: invalid-url URL:
http://www.hibernate.org/subprojects/validator.html HTTP Error 403: Forbidden
hibernate-validator.src: W: invalid-url Source0:
hibernate-validator-4.2.0.Final.tar.xz
hibernate-validator-javadoc.noarch: W: invalid-url URL:
http://www.hibernate.org/subprojects/validator.html HTTP Error 403: Forbidden
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.
this is normal for jboss packages' URLs
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1].
[x] Spec file name must match the base package name, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines[2].
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms.
[x] Buildroot definition is not present
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines[3,4].
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: ASL 2.0
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] All independent sub-packages have license of their own
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
Git source, unpacked tarball matches
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines[5].
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates or must require other
packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] File sections do not contain %defattr(-,root,root,-) unless changed with
good reason
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package does NOT have a %clean section which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). (not needed anymore)
[x] Package consistently uses macros (no %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
mixing)
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x] Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
subpackage
[x] Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlinks)
[x] Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
[x] Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils
[x] Package uses %global not %define
[x] If package uses tarball from VCS include comment how to re-create that
tarball (svn export URL, git clone URL, ...)
[-] If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be
removed prior to building
[x] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[x] Jar files are installed to %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar (see [6] for details)
[x] If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when
building with ant
[x] pom files has correct add_maven_depmap
=== Maven ===
[x] Use %{_mavenpomdir} macro for placing pom files instead of
%{_datadir}/maven2/poms
[-] If package uses -Dmaven.test.skip=true explain why it was needed in a
comment
[-] If package uses custom depmap -Dmaven.local.depmap.file=* explain why
it's needed in a comment
[x] Package DOES NOT use %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[x] Packages DOES NOT have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on
jpackage-utils for %update_maven_depmap macro
=== Other suggestions ===
[x] If possible use upstream build method (maven/ant/javac)
[x] Avoid having BuildRequires on exact NVR unless necessary
[x] Package has BuildArch: noarch (if possible)
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3888606
=== Issues ===
None noted.
*** 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.
[Bug 799976] Review Request: hibernate-validator - Bean Validation (JSR 303) Reference Implementation
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=799976 Juan Hernández juan.hernan...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|652183(FE-JAVASIG) | Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Juan Hernández juan.hernan...@redhat.com 2012-03-13 11:30:39 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: hibernate-validator Short Description: Bean Validation (JSR 303) Reference Implementation Owners: jhernand Branches: f17 InitialCC: goldmann, arg -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 799976] Review Request: hibernate-validator - Bean Validation (JSR 303) Reference Implementation
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=799976 --- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-03-13 11:34:19 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 758734] Review Request: fatrat-subtitlesearch - FatRat plugin enabling OpenSubtitles.org and Sublight.si 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=758734 Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|volke...@gmx.at 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787020] Review Request: trafficserver - Apache Traffic 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=787020 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-13 12:23:10 EDT --- trafficserver-3.0.3-2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 testing repository. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 802865] New: Review Request: perl-Perl-Destruct-Level - Allows you to change perl's internal destruction level
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-Perl-Destruct-Level - Allows you to change perl's internal destruction level https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=802865 Summary: Review Request: perl-Perl-Destruct-Level - Allows you to change perl's internal destruction level Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: p...@city-fan.org QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Spec URL: http://subversion.city-fan.org/repos/cfo-repo/perl-Perl-Destruct-Level/branches/fedora/perl-Perl-Destruct-Level.spec SRPM URL: http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/perl-Perl-Destruct-Level/perl-Perl-Destruct-Level-0.02-2.fc18.src.rpm Description: This module allows you to change perl's internal destruction level. The default value of the destruct level is 0; it means that perl won't bother destroying all of its internal data structures and lets the OS do the cleanup for it at exit. For perls built with debugging support (-DDEBUGGING), an environment variable PERL_DESTRUCT_LEVEL allows you to control the destruction level. This module enables you to modify it on non-debugging perls too. Note that some embedded environments might extend the meaning of the destruction level for their own purposes: mod_perl does that, for example. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 802862] New: Review Request: drupal6-votingapi - Voting API module for Drupal6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: drupal6-votingapi - Voting API module for Drupal6 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=802862 Summary: Review Request: drupal6-votingapi - Voting API module for Drupal6 Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: whe...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Spec URL: http://jknife.fedorapeople.org/SPECS/drupal6-votingapi.spec SRPM URL: http://jknife.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/drupal6-votingapi-2.3-3.el6.src.rpm Description: VotingAPI for Drupal 6 helps developers who want to use a standardized API and schema for storing, retrieving, and tabulating votes for Drupal content. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 799976] Review Request: hibernate-validator - Bean Validation (JSR 303) Reference Implementation
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=799976 Juan Hernández juan.hernan...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2012-03-13 12:44:45 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 795801] Review Request: paranamer - Library for accessing non-private method parameter names at run-time
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=795801 --- Comment #10 from Mattia Verga mattia.ve...@tiscali.it 2012-03-13 12:53:21 EDT --- *** Bug 796332 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 796332] Review Request: paranamer - Method parameter name access
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=796332 Mattia Verga mattia.ve...@tiscali.it changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED CC||mattia.ve...@tiscali.it Resolution||DUPLICATE Flag||fedora-review- Last Closed||2012-03-13 12:53:21 --- Comment #1 from Mattia Verga mattia.ve...@tiscali.it 2012-03-13 12:53:21 EDT --- Closing, duplicate of #795801 *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 795801 *** -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 801614] Review Request: jboss-connector-1.6-api - Java EE Connector Architecture 1.6 API classes
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=801614 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-13 13:09:54 EDT --- jboss-connector-1.6-api-1.0.1-0.1.20120310git9dc9a5.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 testing repository. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 801865] Review Request: jboss-transaction-spi - JBoss Transaction SPI
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=801865 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-13 13:09:59 EDT --- jboss-transaction-spi-7.0.0-2.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 testing repository. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 802443] Review Request: perl-Language-Prolog-Yaswi - Yet another interface to SWI-Prolog
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=802443 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-13 13:09:37 EDT --- perl-Language-Prolog-Types-0.10-1.fc17, perl-Language-Prolog-Yaswi-0.19-1.fc17, perl-Language-Prolog-Sugar-0.06-1.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 testing repository. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 802388] Review Request: perl-Language-Prolog-Sugar - Syntactic sugar for Prolog term constructors
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=802388 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-13 13:09:31 EDT --- perl-Language-Prolog-Types-0.10-1.fc17, perl-Language-Prolog-Yaswi-0.19-1.fc17, perl-Language-Prolog-Sugar-0.06-1.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 testing repository. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 769919] Review Request: hydra - Very fast network log-on cracker
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=769919 --- Comment #17 from Athmane Madjoudj athma...@gmail.com 2012-03-13 13:11:57 EDT --- Upstream responded that he'll include the patchs/fixes. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 730233] Review Request: jboss-jaxrpc-1.1-api - Java API for XML-Based RPC (JAX-RPC) 1.1
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=730233 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 730233] Review Request: jboss-jaxrpc-1.1-api - Java API for XML-Based RPC (JAX-RPC) 1.1
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=730233 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-13 13:31:28 EDT --- jboss-jaxrpc-1.1-api-1.0.1-0.1.20120309gita3c227.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/jboss-jaxrpc-1.1-api-1.0.1-0.1.20120309gita3c227.fc17 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 730233] Review Request: jboss-jaxrpc-1.1-api - Java API for XML-Based RPC (JAX-RPC) 1.1
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=730233 Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|652183(FE-JAVASIG) | -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798715] Review Request: luminance-hdr - A graphical tool for creating and tone-mapping HDR images
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=798715 Franco Comida francocom...@googlemail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798715] Review Request: luminance-hdr - A graphical tool for creating and tone-mapping HDR images
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=798715 --- Comment #24 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-03-13 13:38:24 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 800738] Review Request: avro - Apache Avro is a data serialization system
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=800738 Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||mgold...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mgold...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com 2012-03-13 13:53:18 EDT --- Taking this one. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 737286] Review Request: salt - A parallel remote execution system
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=737286 --- Comment #38 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-13 14:01:18 EDT --- salt-0.9.7-2.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/salt-0.9.7-2.fc17 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 737286] Review Request: salt - A parallel remote execution system
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=737286 --- Comment #39 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-13 14:02:05 EDT --- salt-0.9.7-2.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/salt-0.9.7-2.fc16 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 737286] Review Request: salt - A parallel remote execution system
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=737286 --- Comment #40 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-13 14:02:53 EDT --- salt-0.9.7-2.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/salt-0.9.7-2.fc15 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 802909] Review Request: jboss-interceptor - JBoss EJB Interceptor 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=802909 Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||652183(FE-JAVASIG) -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 802909] New: Review Request: jboss-interceptor - JBoss EJB Interceptor Library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: jboss-interceptor - JBoss EJB Interceptor Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=802909 Summary: Review Request: jboss-interceptor - JBoss EJB Interceptor Library Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mgold...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Spec URL: http://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/package_review/jboss-interceptor/1/jboss-interceptor.spec SRPM URL: http://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/package_review/jboss-interceptor/1/jboss-interceptor-2.0.0-1.fc17.src.rpm Description: JBoss EJB 3.1 Common Interceptor Library -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 730234] Review Request: jboss-ejb-3.1-api - EJB 3.1 API
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=730234 Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||802909 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 802909] Review Request: jboss-interceptor - JBoss EJB Interceptor 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=802909 Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||730234 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 743612] Review Request: lbdb - collect email addresses from several sources and offer them in mutt
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=743612 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||lbdb-0.38-2.fc17 Resolution|NEXTRELEASE |ERRATA --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-13 14:31:17 EDT --- lbdb-0.38-2.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 784156] Review Request: uwsgi - Fast, self-healing, application container 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=784156 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||uwsgi-1.0.4-1.fc17 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-03-13 14:29:55 --- Comment #27 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-13 14:29:55 EDT --- uwsgi-1.0.4-1.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 788159] Review Request: ghc-conduit - Streaming data processing 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=788159 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||ghc-conduit-0.2.2-1.fc17 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-03-13 14:29:26 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-13 14:29:26 EDT --- ghc-conduit-0.2.2-1.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 800890] Review Request: mojarra - JSF Reference Implementation
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=800890 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||mojarra-2.1.7-2.fc17 Resolution|RAWHIDE |ERRATA --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-13 14:31:55 EDT --- mojarra-2.1.7-2.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 734275] Review Request: aqemu - A QT graphical interface to QEMU and KVM
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=734275 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||aqemu-0.8.2-7.fc17 Resolution|NEXTRELEASE |ERRATA --- Comment #34 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-13 14:32:47 EDT --- aqemu-0.8.2-7.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 784799] Review Request: ghc-monad-control - Lift control operations through monad transformers
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=784799 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||ghc-monad-control-0.3.1-1.f ||c17 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-03-13 14:35:26 Bug 784799 depends on bug 784769, which changed state. Bug 784769 Summary: Review Request: ghc-transformers-base - Haskell monad transformer lifting library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784769 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||ERRATA Status|ON_QA |CLOSED --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-13 14:35:26 EDT --- ghc-monad-control-0.3.1-1.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
