[Bug 1199829] Review Request: gtk-theme-config - Little tool to configure GTK theme colors
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1199829 --- Comment #6 from Tonet Jallo tonet6...@gmail.com --- Spec URL: https://tonet666p.fedorapeople.org/gtk-theme-config.spec SRPM URL: https://tonet666p.fedorapeople.org/gtk-theme-config-0.1-3.fc21.src.rpm Description: Hi, I corrected the issues, but i still having error with the license file, i think fedora-review still consider the %doc macro and i used the %licence macro. And, I have also a error in rpmlint section with the appdata file, but it uses the validate-relax parameter and it works. Thanks for the review. Greetings. Fedora Account System Username: tonet666p -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1207946] Review Request: javawriter - A Java API for generating .java source files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1207946 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- javawriter-2.5.1-1.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 testing repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1143032] Review Request: python-gssapi - GSSAPI bindings for python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1143032 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- Package python-gssapi-1.1.0-1.fc22: * should fix your issue, * was pushed to the Fedora 22 testing repository, * should be available at your local mirror within two days. Update it with: # su -c 'yum update --enablerepo=updates-testing python-gssapi-1.1.0-1.fc22' as soon as you are able to. Please go to the following url: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-5657/python-gssapi-1.1.0-1.fc22 then log in and leave karma (feedback). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1047497] Review Request: otcl - MIT Object Tcl
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1047497 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zbys...@in.waw.pl Flags|needinfo?(i...@cicku.me) | --- Comment #20 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl --- I'll pick up the review. Unfortunately it still does not build in rawhide / amd64: ... gcc -shared -o libotcl.so otcl.o /usr/bin/ld: otcl.o: relocation R_X86_64_PC32 against symbol `OTclAsObject' can not be used when making a shared object; recompile with -fPIC /usr/bin/ld: final link failed: Bad value collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status Makefile:102: recipe for target 'libotcl.so' failed make: *** [libotcl.so] Error 1 It builds and runs fine on i386 though. Regarding the license: there's a standard MIT license in file headers. So for simplicity you can use License: MIT. I think the packaging is OK, apart from the build issue. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1177453] Review Request: jxmpp - An Open Source XMPP Java base-library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1177453 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- jxmpp-0.4.1-1.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 testing repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1189611] Review Request: fedpkg-minimal - Script to allow fedpkg fetch to work
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1189611 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- fedpkg-minimal-1.0.0-3.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1189611] Review Request: fedpkg-minimal - Script to allow fedpkg fetch to work
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1189611 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- fedpkg-minimal-1.0.0-3.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1189611] Review Request: fedpkg-minimal - Script to allow fedpkg fetch to work
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1189611 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- fedpkg-minimal-1.0.0-3.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1047702] Review Request: tclcl - Tcl/C++ interface
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1047702 --- Comment #10 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl --- Created attachment 1011505 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1011505action=edit failing build log on rawhide/i386 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1047702] Review Request: tclcl - Tcl/C++ interface
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1047702 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl changed: What|Removed |Added CC||zbys...@in.waw.pl --- Comment #9 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl --- Build fails in rawhide, see attached log. It seems that some private fields in tcl data structures are accessed. Is it possible that something changed in tcl recently? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1208701] Review Request: jpype-py3 - JPype allows Python3 programs full access to Java class libraries
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208701
Raphael Groner projects...@smart.ms changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|POST
--- Comment #8 from Raphael Groner projects...@smart.ms ---
Thanks for the review!
(In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #7)
Please, correct or remove this definition:
# define sitearch for EPEL
%{!?python3_sitearch: %global python3_sitearch %(%{__python2} -c from
distutils.sysconfig import get_python_lib; print(get_python_lib(1)))}
There's currently no Python3 for EPEL. I'll remove this wrong line. You're
right, thanks for the hint.
(In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #5)
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
Apache (v2.0), Unknown or generated. 17 files have unknown license.
Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/gil/1208701-jpype-py3/review-
jpype-py3/licensecheck.txt
jpype-py3-ca6fc96a76d430c753b56ec2a4ed2a3eced0dac3/native/cygwin/jni_md.h
GPLv2
jpype-py3-ca6fc96a76d430c753b56ec2a4ed2a3eced0dac3/native/python/include/capsulethunk.h
GPL/Python
…
[?]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
see above
jni_md.h is part of JDK
capsulethunk.h is part of Python
https://hg.python.org/cpython/file/b4cbecbc0781/Doc/includes/capsulethunk.h
As those both files are GPL'ed, I guess there's no more action needed. Is that
right, please confirm.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
the real version is 0.5.5.2, maybe, you should use
Version:0.5.5.2
Release:0.1.%{date}git%{shortcommit}%{?dist}
* Thu ... - 0.5.5.2-0.1.20150202gitca6fc96
Will be fixed.
[?]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
Not sure how java provides extra debuginfo, rpmbuild must find any if there.
[!]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
rawhide scratch: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9417336
== OK
[?]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process.
Copr build does not allow any network access and is success:
https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/raphgro/playground/build/84763/
[?]: %check is present and all tests pass.
(In reply to Raphael Groner from comment #1)
Open issue: How to run the provided tests/testsuite.py without installing
the jpype module what is assumed in the test?
Still thinking about using that testsuite.py somehow for %check …
jpype-py3.src: E: specfile-error sh: line 0: fg: no job control
i dont understand this error ...
You build for i386. Not tried yet by myself. Maybe an explanation for failure.
But all x86_64 builds work (local rpmbuild f21, koji scratch rawhide, copr
f20+f21+rawhide).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1208701] Review Request: jpype-py3 - JPype allows Python3 programs full access to Java class libraries
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208701 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1208701] Review Request: jpype-py3 - JPype allows Python3 programs full access to Java class libraries
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208701 --- Comment #10 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1205587] Review Request: perl-Net-OpenID-Server - Library for building your own OpenID server/provider
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1205587 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- perl-Net-OpenID-Server-1.09-1.fc22 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 22. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Net-OpenID-Server-1.09-1.fc22 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1199829] Review Request: gtk-theme-config - Little tool to configure GTK theme colors
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1199829 --- Comment #7 from Jonathan Underwood jonathan.underw...@gmail.com --- Just a cursory look at the Spec file tells me you've not addressed all of the issues I raised previously. Eg. The summary still has a . at the end. You've not done anything about ensuring the compiler flags are set correctly. Please go over the list once more and ensure you've tackled all of the issues I raised before. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1186501] Review Request: libticables2 - Texas Instruments link cables library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1186501 --- Comment #13 from Ben Rosser rosser@gmail.com --- That wasn't quite right-- the tests were failing because the code did not wrap libusb_init around any kind of success check, so when /dev was not mounted or when the minimal /dev that mock mounts was mounted, libusb_init would fail. I looked at the libusbx test code for libusb_init and wrote a patch that fixes this. The patch will get sent upstream; the SPEC, SRPM, and patch are here: Spec URL: https://tc01.fedorapeople.org/tilp2/libticables2.spec SRPM URL: https://tc01.fedorapeople.org/tilp2/libticables2-1.3.4-3.fc21.src.rpm and patch: https://tc01.fedorapeople.org/tilp2/libticables-libusb_check.patch -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1208821] Review Request: rubygem-gtksourceview3 - Ruby binding of gtksourceview-3.x
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208821
František Dvořák val...@civ.zcu.cz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from František Dvořák val...@civ.zcu.cz ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
LGPL (v2.1 or later), Unknown or generated.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
Ruby:
[x]: Platform dependent files must all go under %{gem_extdir_mri}, platform
independent under %{gem_dir}.
[x]: Gem package must not define a non-gem subpackage
[x]: Macro %{gem_extdir} is deprecated.
[x]: Gem package is named rubygem-%{gem_name}
[x]: Package contains BuildRequires: rubygems-devel.
[x]: Gem package must define %{gem_name} macro.
[x]: Package does not contain Requires: ruby(abi).
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[x]: Avoid bundling fonts in non-fonts packages.
Note: Package contains font files
Note: In generated docs
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[x]: Package functions as described.
OK: xvfb-run ruby -e 'require gtksourceview3'
OK: samples
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license
[Bug 1208701] Review Request: jpype-py3 - JPype allows Python3 programs full access to Java class libraries
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208701 --- Comment #11 from Raphael Groner projects...@smart.ms --- Sorry, I've to make two corrections … (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #5) [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: Apache (v2.0), Unknown or generated. 17 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/gil/1208701-jpype-py3/review- jpype-py3/licensecheck.txt jpype-py3-ca6fc96a76d430c753b56ec2a4ed2a3eced0dac3/native/cygwin/jni_md.h GPLv2 jpype-py3-ca6fc96a76d430c753b56ec2a4ed2a3eced0dac3/native/python/include/capsulethunk.h GPL/Python … [?]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. see above jni_md.h is part of JDK capsulethunk.h is part of Python https://hg.python.org/cpython/file/b4cbecbc0781/Doc/includes/capsulethunk.h As those both files are GPL'ed, I'll add GPLv2 to License: and mention both files in a comment. [?]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. Not sure how setup.py does extra debuginfo for all languages involved here (cpp, java, python), rpmbuild must find any if there. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1199829] Review Request: gtk-theme-config - Little tool to configure GTK theme colors
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1199829 --- Comment #8 from Jonathan Underwood jonathan.underw...@gmail.com --- Also, your spec file changelog entries need to be more informative than simply Correcting some spec file issues. For example, you've dropped a patch - why so? That sort of information is very important in the changelog if others are going to help maintain your package. And, in particular, it would help me to review your package changes. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1205587] Review Request: perl-Net-OpenID-Server - Library for building your own OpenID server/provider
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1205587 Jitka Plesnikova jples...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED Fixed In Version||perl-Net-OpenID-Server-1.09 ||-1.fc23 --- Comment #4 from Jitka Plesnikova jples...@redhat.com --- Thank you for the review and the repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1196957] Review Request: python-XStatic-Angular-lrdragndrop - Angular-lrdragndrop (XStatic packaging standard)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1196957 --- Comment #4 from Matthias Runge mru...@redhat.com --- New pypi package is: https://pypi.python.org/pypi/XStatic-Angular-lrdragndrop/1.0.2.2 Will update this request to match upstream asap. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1208701] Review Request: jpype-py3 - JPype allows Python3 programs full access to Java class libraries
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208701 Raphael Groner projects...@smart.ms changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #9 from Raphael Groner projects...@smart.ms --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: jpype-py3 Short Description: JPype allows Python3 programs full access to Java class libraries Upstream URL: https://github.com/tcalmant/jpype-py3 Owners: raphgro Branches: f21 f22 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1209205] Review Request: python-google-apputils - Google Application Utilities for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1209205 Bug 1209205 depends on bug 1209203, which changed state. Bug 1209203 Summary: Add python3 package https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1209203 What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |CANTFIX -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1209205] Review Request: python-google-apputils - Google Application Utilities for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1209205 Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On|1209203 | --- Comment #1 from Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com --- Dropping BR on python3-mox - not running test for python 3 package. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1209203 [Bug 1209203] Add python3 package -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1209205] Review Request: python-google-apputils - Google Application Utilities for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1209205 Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||python-sig@lists.fedoraproj ||ect.org --- Comment #2 from Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com --- Needed to build protobuf package. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1208738] Review Request: vera++ - A tool for verification, analysis and transformation of C++ source code
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208738 Raphael Groner projects...@smart.ms changed: What|Removed |Added See Also|https://bugzilla.redhat.com | |/show_bug.cgi?id=1209261| -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1209205] Review Request: python-google-apputils - Google Application Utilities for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1209205 Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1154474 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1154474 [Bug 1154474] New upstream release: protobuf -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1208738] Review Request: vera++ - A tool for verification, analysis and transformation of C++ source code
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208738 --- Comment #8 from Raphael Groner projects...@smart.ms --- Tried with fedora-review but mock build fails for rawhide. Relevant log snippet: /usr/bin/cmake -E cmake_progress_report /builddir/build/BUILD/vera++-1.3.0/build/CMakeFiles 36 [ 63%] Building CXX object src/CMakeFiles/vera.dir/structures/SourceLines.cpp.o cd /builddir/build/BUILD/vera++-1.3.0/build/src /usr/lib64/ccache/c++ -DVERA_LUA -DVERA_PYTHON -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Werror=format-security -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector-strong --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -grecord-gcc-switches -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-hardened-cc1 -m64 -mtune=generic -isystem /usr/include/python2.7 -I/builddir/build/BUILD/vera++-1.3.0/build/src-o CMakeFiles/vera.dir/structures/SourceLines.cpp.o -c /builddir/build/BUILD/vera++-1.3.0/src/structures/SourceLines.cpp c++: internal compiler error: Killed (program cc1plus) Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla for instructions. I'll attach the full build.log file. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1208738] Review Request: vera++ - A tool for verification, analysis and transformation of C++ source code
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208738 --- Comment #10 from Taylor Braun-Jones tay...@braun-jones.org --- (In reply to Raphael Groner from comment #8) Tried with fedora-review but mock build fails for rawhide. Thanks. Yes, I need to look into that as soon as f22, epel6, and epel7 are squared away. I'm guessing it's related to: https://bitbucket.org/verateam/vera/issue/71 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1208738] Review Request: vera++ - A tool for verification, analysis and transformation of C++ source code
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208738 --- Comment #11 from Raphael Groner projects...@smart.ms --- Okay, for now this is FTBFS. Each package must be build for rawhide to comply with policy. Unfortunately, we must wait for upstream or any available patch to fix gcc5. While this is not happening, the review is stalled. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1057874] Review Request: libspf2 - Implementation of the Sender Policy Framework for SMTP authorization
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057874 Matt Domsch matt_dom...@dell.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(matt_domsch@dell. |fedora-cvs? |com)| --- Comment #22 from Matt Domsch matt_dom...@dell.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: libspf2 Short Description: Implementation of the Sender Policy Framework for SMTP authorization Upstream URL: http://www.libspf2.org/ Owners: mdomsch Branches: el6 epel7 f20 f21 InitialCC: st...@stevejenkins.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1208738] Review Request: vera++ - A tool for verification, analysis and transformation of C++ source code
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208738 --- Comment #9 from Raphael Groner projects...@smart.ms --- Created attachment 1011553 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1011553action=edit c++: internal compiler error: Killed (program cc1plus) build.log as mock gives me within a run of fedora-review. c++: internal compiler error: Killed (program cc1plus) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1208738] Review Request: vera++ - A tool for verification, analysis and transformation of C++ source code
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208738 Raphael Groner projects...@smart.ms changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://bugzilla.redhat.com ||/show_bug.cgi?id=1209261 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1209166] Review Request: palo - cell-oriented, multi-dimensional in-memory OLAP server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1209166 --- Comment #3 from Michael myk...@gmail.com --- Thanks Jared - that allowed me to proceed with the Koji build, but am now seeing a couple more build issues. I'll look to address those before updating the .spec and .rpm files. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1209299] Review Request: rubygem-msgpack - MessagePack, a binary-based efficient data interchange format
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1209299 --- Comment #1 from Graeme Gillies ggill...@redhat.com --- Successfully scratch built in rawhide http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9425094 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1209299] New: Review Request: rubygem-msgpack - MessagePack, a binary-based efficient data interchange format
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1209299 Bug ID: 1209299 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-msgpack - MessagePack, a binary-based efficient data interchange format Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: ggill...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://ggillies.fedorapeople.org//rubygem-msgpack.spec SRPM URL: http://ggillies.fedorapeople.org//rubygem-msgpack-0.5.11-1.fc21.src.rpm Description: MessagePack is a binary-based efficient object serialization library. It enables to exchange structured objects between many languages like JSON. But unlike JSON, it is very fast and small. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1208738] Review Request: vera++ - A tool for verification, analysis and transformation of C++ source code
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208738 --- Comment #12 from Taylor Braun-Jones tay...@braun-jones.org --- Thanks, I didn't realize that was the policy (nor did the two reviewers of my recently approved ceres-solver package request which also has problems building with gcc-5.0) I'm not able to reproduce the rawhide error that you're are seeing. Since what you were seeing was an internal compiler error, I wonder if it was a buggy gcc-c++ package that has already been updated in the last 5 hours. I did however hit a couple failing unit tests due to incompatibility with Lua 5.3. I have simply disabled Lua support on Fedora 22 for now. Upstream bug report: https://bitbucket.org/verateam/vera/issue/74/vera-segfaults-when-built-with-lua-53#comment-17202574 Successful rawhide scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9425142 The spec and srpm files at the original URLs have been updated. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1209205] Review Request: python-google-apputils - Google Application Utilities for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1209205 Brendan Jones brendan.jones...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||brendan.jones...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|brendan.jones...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #3 from Brendan Jones brendan.jones...@gmail.com --- I can tek this review. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1208904] Review Request: python-jenkins-job-builder - Manage Jenkins jobs with YAML
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208904 Colin Walters walt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Colin Walters walt...@redhat.com --- Ok, so no dependencies that aren't in Fedora now, good. fedora-review isn't working for me, so no automated paste. - Maybe create a macro for the description rather than copy/paste - What is PBR_VERSION? There are no hits for that in the source I see These are minor issues though, setting fedora_review+ since they can be fixed before or after commit. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 858085] Review Request: mingw-qt5-qtxmlpatterns - Qt5 for Windows - QtXmlPatterns component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=858085 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|mingw-qt5-qtwebsockets-5.4. |mingw-qt5-qtwebsockets-5.4. |1-1.fc21|1-1.fc20 --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- mingw-qt5-qtwebsockets-5.4.1-1.fc20, mingw-qt5-qtxmlpatterns-5.4.1-1.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1205459] Review Request: mingw-qt5-qtwebsockets - Qt5 for Windows - QtWebSockets component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1205459 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|mingw-qt5-qtwebsockets-5.4. |mingw-qt5-qtwebsockets-5.4. |1-1.fc21|1-1.fc20 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- mingw-qt5-qtwebsockets-5.4.1-1.fc20, mingw-qt5-qtxmlpatterns-5.4.1-1.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1206901] Review Request: dreamweb - Click-and-point adventure with the look and feel of Ridley Scott's Blade Runner
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1206901 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|dreamweb-1.1-1.fc21 |dreamweb-1.1-1.fc20 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- dreamweb-1.1-1.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1177453] Review Request: jxmpp - An Open Source XMPP Java base-library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1177453 Patrick Uiterwijk puiterw...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1177453] Review Request: jxmpp - An Open Source XMPP Java base-library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1177453 --- Comment #8 from Patrick Uiterwijk puiterw...@redhat.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1206901] Review Request: dreamweb - Click-and-point adventure with the look and feel of Ridley Scott's Blade Runner
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1206901 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||dreamweb-1.1-1.fc21 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2015-04-06 04:31:59 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- dreamweb-1.1-1.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1205459] Review Request: mingw-qt5-qtwebsockets - Qt5 for Windows - QtWebSockets component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1205459 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|mingw-qt5-qtwebsockets-5.4. |mingw-qt5-qtwebsockets-5.4. |1-1.fc22|1-1.fc21 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- mingw-qt5-qtwebsockets-5.4.1-1.fc21, mingw-qt5-qtxmlpatterns-5.4.1-1.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 858085] Review Request: mingw-qt5-qtxmlpatterns - Qt5 for Windows - QtXmlPatterns component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=858085 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|mingw-qt5-qtwebsockets-5.4. |mingw-qt5-qtwebsockets-5.4. |1-1.fc22|1-1.fc21 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- mingw-qt5-qtwebsockets-5.4.1-1.fc21, mingw-qt5-qtxmlpatterns-5.4.1-1.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1207946] Review Request: javawriter - A Java API for generating .java source files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1207946 --- Comment #7 from Patrick Uiterwijk puiterw...@redhat.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1207946] Review Request: javawriter - A Java API for generating .java source files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1207946 Patrick Uiterwijk puiterw...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1057874] Review Request: libspf2 - Implementation of the Sender Policy Framework for SMTP authorization
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057874 Christopher Meng i...@cicku.me changed: What|Removed |Added CC|i...@cicku.me | Flags|fedora-review? | --- Comment #18 from Christopher Meng i...@cicku.me --- I'm going to leave this bug since Steve has shown more interests on it. And Steve, next time when you take over the review, please notify me first. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1191498] Review Request: safelease - legacy locking mechanism for VDSM
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1191498 --- Comment #9 from Yaniv Bronhaim ybron...@redhat.com --- safelease.spec includes License:GPLv2+ statement in line 7 I don't see anything else required in term of Licensing -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1204614] Review Request: gofed - Tool for development of golang devel packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1204614 Jan Chaloupka jchal...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA --- Comment #16 from Jan Chaloupka jchal...@redhat.com --- Hi Ville, debug info is no longer empty. The first fedora-review was run on a spec file with no debug info stripping. The second run was on spec file updated for building binaries with support for debugging symbols. Thus debuginfo package is no longer empty. $ rpm -qpl gofed-debuginfo-0.0.1-0.1.git62b0051.fc23.x86_64.rpm /usr/lib/debug /usr/lib/debug/.build-id /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/7c /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/7c/11b13a5b64746ad7fdf1dc5fbe8f238381f344 /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/7c/11b13a5b64746ad7fdf1dc5fbe8f238381f344.debug /usr/lib/debug/usr /usr/lib/debug/usr/share /usr/lib/debug/usr/share/gofed /usr/lib/debug/usr/share/gofed/parseGo.debug -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1207946] Review Request: javawriter - A Java API for generating .java source files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1207946 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- javawriter-2.5.1-1.fc22 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 22. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/javawriter-2.5.1-1.fc22 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1207946] Review Request: javawriter - A Java API for generating .java source files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1207946 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1177453] Review Request: jxmpp - An Open Source XMPP Java base-library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1177453 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1177453] Review Request: jxmpp - An Open Source XMPP Java base-library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1177453 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- jxmpp-0.4.1-1.fc22 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 22. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/jxmpp-0.4.1-1.fc22 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1208222] Review Request: okteta4 - Binary/hex editor for KDE4
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208222 --- Comment #5 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu --- Sorry, bad SRMM URL, here are better links: Spec URL: https://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/plasma5/okteta4.spec SRPM URL: https://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/plasma5/okteta4-4.14.3-51.fc22.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1208701] Review Request: jpype-py3 - JPype allows Python3 programs full access to Java class libraries
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208701
--- Comment #7 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it ---
Please, correct or remove this definition:
# define sitearch for EPEL
%{!?python3_sitearch: %global python3_sitearch %(%{__python2} -c from
distutils.sysconfig import get_python_lib; print(get_python_lib(1)))}
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1201028] Review Request: twitter-util - Miscellaneous Idiomatic Scala Utilities Wrappers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1201028 gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||652183 (FE-JAVASIG) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652183 [Bug 652183] Java SIG tracker bug -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1208738] Review Request: vera++ - A tool for verification, analysis and transformation of C++ source code
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208738
--- Comment #7 from Taylor Braun-Jones tay...@braun-jones.org ---
Looking into the details of vera++, the Fedora Tcl guidelines, and the
%{name}-plugins subpackage option:
* A tcl-%{name} package does not apply because vera++ includes a build-in Tcl
interpretter.
* I'm not sure a %{name}-plugins subpackage makes sense either because the
out-of-the-box expected behavior is to be able to run a default set of checks
and transformations be simply running `vera++ foo.cpp`
I've updated the spec and srpm links with the latest fixes.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1143032] Review Request: python-gssapi - GSSAPI bindings for python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1143032 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1057874] Review Request: libspf2 - Implementation of the Sender Policy Framework for SMTP authorization
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057874 --- Comment #19 from Matt Domsch matt_dom...@dell.com --- The packaging request had gone cold for the better part of a year, mostly because I didn't think it was necessary any longer, partly because I didn't have time to work on it a year ago. Steve is packaging the first consumer of it in OpenDKIM which just came to light as needing it. I'm glad for everyone (Christopher, Felix, SFteve, and Michael) who have taken the time to improve on this package. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1191498] Review Request: safelease - legacy locking mechanism for VDSM
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1191498 Douglas Schilling Landgraf dougsl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review+ |fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1177453] Review Request: jxmpp - An Open Source XMPP Java base-library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1177453 --- Comment #10 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it --- Unable to build the package on F21 builder. See: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1209134 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1177453] Review Request: jxmpp - An Open Source XMPP Java base-library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1177453 gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1209134 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1209134 [Bug 1209134] Packge build fails with - error retrieving sources, mock exited with status 1 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1120788] Review Request: Rex - Tool for Automation, Remote Execution and Configuration Deployment
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1120788 Dominic Hopf dma...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(i...@cicku.me) --- Comment #4 from Dominic Hopf dma...@fedoraproject.org --- Dear Christopher Meng, I'd kindly like to remind you that you assigned this review to yourself by your own interest. The review unfortunately still did not happen. There is Rex 1.1.0 out in the meanwhile and I've built some new packages for that: Spec URL: https://dmaphy.fedorapeople.org/Rex/Rex.spec SRPM URL: https://dmaphy.fedorapeople.org/Rex/Rex-1.1.0-1.fc21.src.rpm Koji Scratch Build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9421015 May I ask when you plan to take care of this review then? Best Regards, Dominic -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1207948] Review Request: dagger - A fast dependency injector for Android and Java
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1207948 --- Comment #1 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it --- Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9420633 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1204558] Review Request: stringtemplate407 - A Java template engine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1204558 gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |NOTABUG Last Closed||2015-04-06 08:53:00 --- Comment #1 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it --- No more interested -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1204560] Review Request: antlr41 - ANother Tool for Language Recognition
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1204560 Bug 1204560 depends on bug 1204558, which changed state. Bug 1204558 Summary: Review Request: stringtemplate407 - A Java template engine https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1204558 What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |NOTABUG -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1206080] Review Request: antlr4 - Java parser generator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1206080 gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|652183 (FE-JAVASIG) | Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652183 [Bug 652183] Java SIG tracker bug -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1207847] Review Request: auto - A collection of source code generators for Java
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1207847 gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||652183 (FE-JAVASIG) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652183 [Bug 652183] Java SIG tracker bug -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1191498] Review Request: safelease - legacy locking mechanism for VDSM
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1191498 --- Comment #10 from Douglas Schilling Landgraf dougsl...@redhat.com --- (In reply to Yaniv Bronhaim from comment #9) safelease.spec includes License:GPLv2+ statement in line 7 I don't see anything else required in term of Licensing It's about %license Yaniv. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1143032] Review Request: python-gssapi - GSSAPI bindings for python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1143032 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- python-gssapi-1.1.0-1.fc22 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 22. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-gssapi-1.1.0-1.fc22 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1209166] Review Request: palo - cell-oriented, multi-dimensional in-memory OLAP server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1209166 Jared Smith jsmith.fed...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jsmith.fed...@gmail.com --- Comment #2 from Jared Smith jsmith.fed...@gmail.com --- As for issue #2, the build system doesn't allow network access -- so you'll need to make sure any needed files/sources are part of the sources in the spec file, and not downloaded on-demand. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1208911] Review Request: doublecmd-qt - Twin-panel (commander-style) file manager (Qt4)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208911 Raphael Groner projects...@smart.ms changed: What|Removed |Added See Also|https://bugzilla.redhat.com | |/show_bug.cgi?id=1203118| -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1177055] (mesos) Review Request: mesos - Cluster Manager
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1177055 --- Comment #9 from Jay Vyas jv...@redhat.com --- happy to lend a hand if anything i can do to help. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1209166] Review Request: palo - cell-oriented, multi-dimensional in-memory OLAP server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1209166 --- Comment #1 from Michael myk...@gmail.com --- I've informed the upstream that I have begun the process of packaging the palo server for fedora with the following post: http://www.jedox.com/community/palo-forum/index.php?page=ThreadpostID=18062#post18062 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1208222] Review Request: okteta4 - Binary/hex editor for KDE4
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208222
Florian der-flo Lehner d...@der-flo.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #6 from Florian der-flo Lehner d...@der-flo.net ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- update-desktop-database is invoked in %post and %postun if package contains
desktop file(s) with a MimeType: entry.
Note: desktop file(s) with MimeType entry in okteta4-libs
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#desktop-
database
Package uses gtk-update-icon-cache and update-mime-database instead
--- no issue
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[-]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
GPL, LGPL (v2), LGPL (v2.1 or later), LGPL, Unknown or
generated. 30 files have unknown license.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must
be documented in the spec.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/include/kde4,
/usr/include/kde4/KDE
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/include/kde4/okteta1
(okteta-devel), /usr/include/kde4/KDE/Kasten2(okteta-devel),
/usr/share/kde4/apps/okteta(okteta),
/usr/share/kde4/apps/okteta/structures(okteta), /usr/include/kde4/kasten2
(okteta-devel), /usr/share/kde4/apps/okteta/structures/png(okteta),
/usr/share/kde4/apps/oktetapart(okteta),
/usr/include/kde4/kasten2/okteta1(okteta-devel),
/usr/share/kde4/apps/okteta/structures/elf(okteta),
/usr/include/kde4/KDE/Okteta1(okteta-devel)
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop-
file-validate if there is such a file.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' '
[Bug 977116] Review Request: pgmodeler - PostgreSQL Database Modeler
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=977116 --- Comment #31 from Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) pa...@hubbitus.info --- 0.8.1-alpha, AppData included. Changes: https://github.com/Hubbitus/Fedora-packaging/commit/17a50141a6fcce70d04a9570e1934294188b90f9 Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9420096 Spec: https://github.com/Hubbitus/Fedora-packaging/blob/17a50141a6fcce70d04a9570e1934294188b90f9/SPECS/pgmodeler.spec Srpm: http://rpm.hubbitus.info/Fedora21/pgmodeler/pgmodeler-0.8.1-0.alpha.1.fc21.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 760594] Review Request: simcrs - C++ Simulated Travel-Oriented Distribution System Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=760594 Denis Arnaud denis.arnaud_fed...@m4x.org changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||890772 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=890772 [Bug 890772] Review Request: tvlsim - Travel Market Simulator -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 781775] Review Request: sevmgr - C++ Simulation-Oriented Discrete Event Management Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=781775 Denis Arnaud denis.arnaud_fed...@m4x.org changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||890772 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=890772 [Bug 890772] Review Request: tvlsim - Travel Market Simulator -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 732218] Review Request: travelccm - C++ Travel Customer Choice Model Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=732218 Denis Arnaud denis.arnaud_fed...@m4x.org changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||890772 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=890772 [Bug 890772] Review Request: tvlsim - Travel Market Simulator -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 890772] Review Request: tvlsim - Travel Market Simulator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=890772 Denis Arnaud denis.arnaud_fed...@m4x.org changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||760594, 732218, 781775 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=732218 [Bug 732218] Review Request: travelccm - C++ Travel Customer Choice Model Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=760594 [Bug 760594] Review Request: simcrs - C++ Simulated Travel-Oriented Distribution System Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=781775 [Bug 781775] Review Request: sevmgr - C++ Simulation-Oriented Discrete Event Management Library -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1209166] New: Review Request: palo - cell-oriented, multi-dimensional in-memory OLAP server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1209166 Bug ID: 1209166 Summary: Review Request: palo - cell-oriented, multi-dimensional in-memory OLAP server Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: myk...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://myk52348.fedorapeople.org/palo/palo.spec SRPM URL: https://myk52348.fedorapeople.org/palo/palo-5.1-4.fc21.src.rpm Description: Palo is a cell-oriented, multi-dimensional in-memory OLAP server typically used for analysis and data consolidation. Multi-dimensional data can be queried interactively and written back for further consolidation. The server stores and manipulates data in memory. Bespoke Java, PHP, C/C++, and .NET clients can access the palo database via an API or plug-in modules are available for spreadsheet applications like Calc. Fedora Account System Username:myk52348 This is my first package, so I am looking for a sponsor. At this point I am only looking to package the core server, although may follow-up with client libraries and the ETL(extract-transform-load) server. The palo code server is written in c and builds using cmake. The c and c++ client code build using the automake tools. The ETL server builds using maven. At its core this package is a database server so that experience would probably be most relevant. I have no prior packaging experience so I included a couple of questions below that I need help with. Issue 1: on the command line the cmake command cmake ../5.1 successfully builds the server. But when creating the source RPM, this same command fails, unless patch0 is applied. Patch0 essentially hard-codes the paths where the dependency libraries can be located, which is not great. I'm guessing that the macro: %global _hardened_build 1 is changing the cmake behavior. Is there a better way to handle this than via a patch? Issue 2: when building with koji, I get the error: svn: E670002: Unable to connect to a repository at URL 'https://svn.code.sf.net/p/palo/code/molap/server/5.1' svn: E670002: Name or service not known Since the source is stored in a SVN repo and the packaging guidelines indicate I should not place the source into the SOURCE folder, but rather access it from the upstream, how can I resolve this error? Thanks and regards, Michael -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1177055] (mesos) Review Request: mesos - Cluster Manager
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1177055 --- Comment #8 from Timothy St. Clair tstcl...@redhat.com --- remaining deps: zookeeper (in fedora): (deps subject to change on v3.4.6 upgrade) - Missing requires: - ivy-local (fedora local ivy resolver) could possibly skip if EL has better mechanics. - jtoaster (fedora) I need to fix zookeeper for f22 so I'll investigate during that time. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1057874] Review Request: libspf2 - Implementation of the Sender Policy Framework for SMTP authorization
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057874 --- Comment #20 from Steve Jenkins st...@stevejenkins.com --- Apologies, Christopher. Matt's correct in that I figured you were likely off doing other awesome things because this had been shelved for so long, but I still should have at least fired off a courtesy email to you to see if you were interested in jumping back in before just grabbing it. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1057874] Review Request: libspf2 - Implementation of the Sender Policy Framework for SMTP authorization
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057874 Steve Jenkins st...@stevejenkins.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(matt_domsch@dell. ||com) --- Comment #21 from Steve Jenkins st...@stevejenkins.com --- (In reply to Matt Domsch from comment #17) Steve, I hadn't considered EL5. I've got it building fine on EL6 so presumably EL7 will also, and F21 so presumably rawhide. As it stands the autotools stuff is ugly. I'm having to patch each version for the autotools available in it. Maybe I can do that once for the lowest version of each and then it just works for newer OS versions so I'd only need to do so twice. Running the bootstrap / autoreconf in %prep isn't ideal either and would suck in autotools build deps. That makes sense. Including EL5 would be ideal (since I get the sense that majority of RedHat-based production mail servers are on EL systems), but I won't pitch a fit if you determine it's not worth the hassle. I've changed the review flag to +, so if you're good to go, I think this baby is ready for the SCM Admin request. Thank you everyone for so expeditiously resurrecting this package and getting it back on track. Easter pun intended. :) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1208222] Review Request: okteta4 - Binary/hex editor for KDE4
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208222 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #7 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: okteta4 Short Description: Binary/hex editor for KDE4 Upstream URL: https://projects.kde.org/projects/kde/kdesdk/okteta Owners: group::kde-sig rdieter Branches: f22 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1057874] Review Request: libspf2 - Implementation of the Sender Policy Framework for SMTP authorization
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057874 Steve Jenkins st...@stevejenkins.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 905304] Review Request: OpenDMARC - Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting Conformance (DMARC) milter and library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=905304 Steve Jenkins st...@stevejenkins.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed|2015-03-18 06:25:32 |2015-04-06 12:08:13 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1209205] New: Review Request: python-google-apputils - Google Application Utilities for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1209205 Bug ID: 1209205 Summary: Review Request: python-google-apputils - Google Application Utilities for Python Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: or...@cora.nwra.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/python-google-apputils.spec SRPM URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/python-google-apputils-0.4.2-1.fc21.src.rpm Description: This project is a small collection of utilities for building Python applications. It includes some of the same set of utilities used to build and run internal Python apps at Google. Features: * Simple application startup integrated with python-gflags. * Subcommands for command-line applications. * Option to drop into pdb on uncaught exceptions. * Helper functions for dealing with files. * High-level profiling tools. * Timezone-aware wrappers for datetime.datetime classes. * Improved TestCase with the same methods as unittest2, plus helpful flags for test startup. * google_test setuptools command for running tests. * Helper module for creating application stubs. Fedora Account System Username: orion -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1209205] Review Request: python-google-apputils - Google Application Utilities for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1209205 Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1206372 Depends On||1209201, 1209203 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1206372 [Bug 1206372] protobuf is in a broken, unbuildable state in rawhide https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1209201 [Bug 1209201] Add python3 package https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1209203 [Bug 1209203] Add python3 package -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1208222] Review Request: okteta4 - Binary/hex editor for KDE4
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208222 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1208222] Review Request: okteta4 - Binary/hex editor for KDE4
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208222 --- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
