[Bug 1113310] Review Request: python-libnacl - Python ctypes wrapper for libsodium

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1113310



--- Comment #31 from Sergio Pascual  ---
(In reply to Sergio Monteiro Basto from comment #30)

> and we just need change ? 
> Name:   python-%{srcname}
> to 
> Name:   python2-%{srcname}

I like the suggestion in the guidelines of one empty toplevel package
(python-%{srcname}) and a  python2-%{srcname} subpackage. The top level has a
Provides pointing to the package corresponding to the default interpreter in
the release (python2 vs python3)

-- 
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 1293045] Review Request: fontopia - the console font editor

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1293045



--- Comment #2 from Mohammed Isam  ---
(In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #1)

Fixed spec file as above.. Please Check the new version

Spec URL:
http://sites.google.com/site/mohammedisam2000/home/projects/fontopia.spec
SRPM URL:
http://sites.google.com/site/mohammedisam2000/home/projects/fontopia-1.0-2.fc23.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 1285941] Review Request: python-flower - A web based tool for monitoring and administrating Celery clusters

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1285941

Fedora Update System  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 1285941] Review Request: python-flower - A web based tool for monitoring and administrating Celery clusters

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1285941



--- Comment #25 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-flower-0.8.3-4.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-6a09ffb1a8

-- 
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 1288870] Review Request: python-pymc3 - Bayesian statistical modeling and model fitting

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1288870



--- Comment #6 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
(In reply to Yanis Guenane from comment #5)
> 1. Can you condition the py3 related actions (subpackages, build, install,
> %files) ? This way we can use the same spec file on Fedora with python3
> support, and EL7 with no python3 support.
> 
> Using something like the following :
> 
> > %if 0%{?fedora}
> > %global with_python3 1
> > %endif
> >
> > %if 0%{?with_python3}
> > %py3_build
> > %endif

What you propose is useful, but OTOH, there is little reason to
introduce this until the EPEL package actually happens. It is quite
likely that this package will never be built for EPEL, and then this
is wasted effort. If the need ever arises to add this, those
conditionals can be added in the exact same way.

> 2. Upstream provides several files that should go in a %doc in the %files
> section but they are not currently listed. I am thinking about 
> 
>  * changelog.md
>  * readme.md
>  * release-notes.md
> 
> 3. Upstream provides a way to generate a complete documentation[1], a -doc
> subpackage might be a good idea to provide it for the end user.
> 
> [1] https://github.com/pymc-devs/pymc3/blob/master/howto_docs.md

Agreed with the other two comments.

-- 
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 1288651] Review Request: OpenIGTLink - OpenIGTLink network communication protocol implementation

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1288651

Dmitry Mikhirev  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841
[Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a
sponsor
-- 
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 1201870] Review Request: vdr-tvguideng - TvGuideNG is a highly customizable 2D EPG viewer plugin

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1201870



--- Comment #7 from Antonio Trande  ---
(In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #6)
> @Martin
> 
> What do you want to move this package on RPMFusion?

Sorry, bad English. 

Do you prefer to move this package on RPMFusion?

-- 
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 1296974] Review Request: python-beanbag - A helper module for accessing REST APIs

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1296974

Ralph Bean  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||rb...@redhat.com



--- Comment #2 from Ralph Bean  ---
Created attachment 1112947
  --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1112947=edit
patch to python-beanbag.spec

Patch to update the specfile.

-- 
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 1288645] Review Request: teem - Libraries for scientific raster data processing and visualizing

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1288645

Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||zbys...@in.waw.pl



--- Comment #2 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
During build:

1: /builddir/build/BUILD/teem-1.11.0-src/build/bin/nrrdSanity: formats
supported in this build:
1: nrrd: yes
1: pnm: yes
1: png: not available
1: vtk: yes
1: text: yes
1: eps: yes
1: /builddir/build/BUILD/teem-1.11.0-src/build/bin/nrrdSanity: encodings
supported in this build:
1: raw: yes
1: ascii: yes
1: hex: yes
1: gz: not available
1: bz2: not available

It looks like some build dependencies are missing.

Tests fail on x86_64 with:
33: /builddir/build/BUILD/teem-1.11.0-src/build/bin/test_probeSS: trouble
creating volumes:
33: [probeSS] engageGenTensor: trouble loading from new vol tmp-ten.nrrd
...
28/35 Test #33: probeSS_ctmr02 ...***Failed0.41 sec
...
35/35 Test #26: kernall ..   Passed7.61 sec
97% tests passed, 1 tests failed out of 35
Total Test time (real) =   8.18 sec
The following tests FAILED:
 33 - probeSS_ctmr02 (Failed)
Errors while running CTest

-- 
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 1062049] Review Request: rubygem-rinku - Autolinking for Ruby

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062049



--- Comment #4 from Upstream Release Monitoring 
 ---
ktdreyer's scratch build of rubygem-rinku-1.7.3-4.fc24.src.rpm for rawhide
completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12468993

-- 
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 1288870] Review Request: python-pymc3 - Bayesian statistical modeling and model fitting

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1288870



--- Comment #7 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
... so, what's the plan here? I guess that parallelized tests are not possible
now. There are a few issues raised in comments #1 and #5. Can you fix/reject
those and make a new version?

-- 
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 1296974] Review Request: python-beanbag - A helper module for accessing REST APIs

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1296974

Ralph Bean  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |MODIFIED
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|rb...@redhat.com



--- Comment #3 from Ralph Bean  ---
Hi Stanislav, I attached a patch to the specfile which should update it to
reflect some of the more current practices for python packaging.  I'll take the
review once you can have a look over that and re-post an updated version of the
srpm.

-- 
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 1201870] Review Request: vdr-tvguideng - TvGuideNG is a highly customizable 2D EPG viewer plugin

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1201870

Antonio Trande  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||mgans...@alice.de
  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review-
   ||needinfo?(mgans...@alice.de
   ||)



--- Comment #6 from Antonio Trande  ---
@Martin

What do you want to move this package on RPMFusion?

-- 
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 1288870] Review Request: python-pymc3 - Bayesian statistical modeling and model fitting

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1288870

Yanis Guenane  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||yguen...@redhat.com



--- Comment #5 from Yanis Guenane  ---
My review is yet unofficial as I am not part of the packager group.

I have three remarks one the spec file.

1. Can you condition the py3 related actions (subpackages, build, install,
%files) ? This way we can use the same spec file on Fedora with python3
support, and EL7 with no python3 support.

Using something like the following :

> %if 0%{?fedora}
> %global with_python3 1
> %endif
>
> %if 0%{?with_python3}
> %py3_build
> %endif

2. Upstream provides several files that should go in a %doc in the %files
section but they are not currently listed. I am thinking about 

 * changelog.md
 * readme.md
 * release-notes.md

3. Upstream provides a way to generate a complete documentation[1], a -doc
subpackage might be a good idea to provide it for the end user.

[1] https://github.com/pymc-devs/pymc3/blob/master/howto_docs.md

-- 
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 1273579] Review Request: nest - The neural simulation tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1273579



--- Comment #12 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
(In reply to Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) from comment #11)
> I'm happy to continue the review if another reviewer comes along,
I don't understand this sentence. Raphael said that he can review the package
in comment #8. If he cannot do it, I'm sure that somebody else (e.g. me) would
step up.

> but I do
> think a re-review will be in order (even if unofficially) if the build
> system and change. 
Nah, the build system is not visible in the binary package. As long as it
builds nobody cares (except the maintainer of course).

> Is the plan to get all the neuroscience packages into Fedora by F24, though
> - or can we have a "group copr" thing running and transition packages over
> as they pass review?

I don't think there's a plan to get "all" neuroscience packages into Fedora,
there's probably too many to even consider that.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NeuroFedora doesn't have a specific
list. New packages can be added at any time, and there's quite a bit of time
before Fedora 24 release (2016-05-17). I don't know about any plans to have a
group copr. I see coprs as a good mechanism to provide alternative versions of
already packaged software, or often updated software, or things which are
inappropriate for main Fedora for other reasons. I don't think nest or other
science related software falls into any of those categories, and making a
"detour" through copr would be mostly a waste of 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 1273579] Review Request: nest - The neural simulation tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1273579



--- Comment #13 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD)  ---
(In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #12)
> (In reply to Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) from comment #11)
> > I'm happy to continue the review if another reviewer comes along,
> I don't understand this sentence. Raphael said that he can review the
> package in comment #8. If he cannot do it, I'm sure that somebody else (e.g.
> me) would step up.

Oh, he dropped the review after I asked his opinion about the build system
change in comment 9 which I took as an indication that he agreed with me
putting off the package (He isn't the assignee any more, and he isn't in the CC
list either) :)

> 
> > but I do
> > think a re-review will be in order (even if unofficially) if the build
> > system and change. 
> Nah, the build system is not visible in the binary package. As long as it
> builds nobody cares (except the maintainer of course).

That is what I meant - when a new build system comes, the entire package has to
be effectively redone, and nest, as you'll see from the spec, isn't the
simplest of packages. Totally a maintainers burden, yes, but I'm going to be
the maintainer ;)

> 
> > Is the plan to get all the neuroscience packages into Fedora by F24, though
> > - or can we have a "group copr" thing running and transition packages over
> > as they pass review?
> 
> I don't think there's a plan to get "all" neuroscience packages into Fedora,
> there's probably too many to even consider that.
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NeuroFedora doesn't have a specific
> list. New packages can be added at any time, and there's quite a bit of time
> before Fedora 24 release (2016-05-17). I don't know about any plans to have
> a group copr. I see coprs as a good mechanism to provide alternative
> versions of already packaged software, or often updated software, or things
> which are inappropriate for main Fedora for other reasons. I don't think
> nest or other science related software falls into any of those categories,
> and making a "detour" through copr would be mostly a waste of time.

I think the list is somewhere on a google spreadsheet. I don't have the link
handy at the moment. 

Coprs are also a good mechanism for packages that build and are functional but
are not packaged well enough to pass a formal review yet (outer ring in
fedora.next and all that), which is exactly what the nest package is at the
moment.

Anyway, I'm happy to continue the review if someone takes it up. I'll update
the spec with Raphael's comments later this week. I already updated the copr
package to 2.10 which came out recently. I need to work on the python3 bit etc.

Cheers!
Ankur

-- 
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 1293045] Review Request: fontopia - the console font editor

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1293045

Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Docs Contact|zbys...@in.waw.pl   |
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zbys...@in.waw.pl
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #3 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
+ license is OK (GPLv3+)
+ license file is present, %license is used
+ latest version
+ builds and install OK
+ scriptlets match guidelines
+ standard macros are used

You could %exlude %{_pkgdocdir}/COPYING to avoid duplicated file (and a warning
from rpmlint).

Unfortunately you violate one significant guideline: the package uses stuff
packaged as %doc at runtime. When installed with --exludedocs, internal help is
missing and other things are broken too.

-- 
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 1294904] Review Request: python-rpm-macros - The unversioned Python RPM macros

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1294904



--- Comment #11 from Orion Poplawski  ---
Spec URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/python-rpm-macros.spec
SRPM URL:
http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/python-rpm-macros-3-3.el7.src.rpm

%changelog
* Thu Jan 8 2016 Orion Poplawski  3-3
- Add empty %%prep and %%build

-- 
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 1289717] Review Request: viennacl - Linear algebra and solver library using CUDA, OpenCL, and OpenMP

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1289717

Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||zbys...@in.waw.pl



--- Comment #4 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
Please put BuildRequires (and other tags) with one package per line. This makes
things much easier to read (and diffs look better too).

Package looks good, but it seems that it doesn't make sense to release without
the fixes queued for 1.7.1.

-- 
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 1294904] Review Request: python-rpm-macros - The unversioned Python RPM macros

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1294904

Antonio Trande  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?(anto.trande@gmail |
   |.com)   |



--- Comment #10 from Antonio Trande  ---
- I think it's better to include %prep/%build sections.

$ rpmlint -I no-%prep-section
no-%prep-section:
The spec file does not contain a %prep section.  Even if some packages don't
directly need it, section markers may be overridden in rpm's configuration to
provide additional "under the hood" functionality.  Add the section, even if
empty.


Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed


Issues:
===
- Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel


= MUST items =

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.
[-]: 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 %license.
[-]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla
 upstream sources. No licenses found. Please check the source files for
 licenses manually.
[-]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/rpm/macros.d,
 /usr/lib/rpm
[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.
[-]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[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]: Dist tag is present.
[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 does not use a name that already exists.
[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

Python:
[?]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
 Note: Cannot find any build in BUILD directory (--prebuilt option?)
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
 process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
 provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
 file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[-]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
 Note: No 

[Bug 1289760] Review Request: drawtk - A C library to perform efficient 3D drawings

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1289760

Dmitry Mikhirev  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841
[Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a
sponsor
-- 
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 1293045] Review Request: fontopia - the console font editor

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1293045

Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  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 1296884] Review Request: perl-Test-Regexp - Test your regular expressions

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1296884

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-Test-Regexp-2015110201-2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-79d5cb0aa3

-- 
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 1288651] Review Request: OpenIGTLink - OpenIGTLink network communication protocol implementation

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1288651

Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||zbys...@in.waw.pl
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zbys...@in.waw.pl
  Flags||fedora-review?



--- Comment #2 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
The name should be lowercase
[https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#General_Naming],
it's hard to remember (or type) or those mixed-case letters.

You could use a single doc directory:
%global _docdir_fmt %{name}

Don't repeat the package name in summary. It's also better to drop the article,
listings look better without.

I don't see any issues otherwise.

-- 
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 1295154] Review Request: python-prompt_toolkit - Library for building powerful interactive command lines in Python

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295154



--- Comment #13 from Terje Røsten  ---
Ok, I see. 

mycli @ github now requires 0.57:

 https://github.com/dbcli/mycli/commit/32e923c590d46b90e3a4ff2660354f803315867c

A 0.57 release in fedora would be nice :-)

Let's hope API changes slows down.

-- 
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 1265685] Review Request: sylfilter -- a Bayesian spam filter for mailers

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1265685

Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841
[Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a
sponsor
-- 
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 1295127] Review Request: awscli - Universal Command Line Environment for AWS

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295127



--- Comment #3 from Antonio Trande  ---
- Defining py2_build/py2_install macros on rhel is not need; you can use
expanded form in all builds.

- python?-packages are not defined. See how is written an example SPEC file: 
  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Example_common_spec_file

- See also how to avoid collisions between the python 2 and python 3 stacks

- Use macro as much as possible:

/usr/share/bash-completion/completions -->
%{_datadir}/bash-completion/completions

- ??
%if 0%{?fedora}
BuildRequires: bash-completion
%endif # Fedora

In this way, bash-completion will be installed only on Fedora and it's not
necessary for building, but as Requires package I think.

Like so 'zsh' is a Requires package because you install 'aws_zsh_completer.sh'
in '/usr/share/zsh/site-functions'.

-- 
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 1294856] Review Request: python3-pytest - Simple powerful testing with Python

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1294856

Fedora Update System  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 1294856] Review Request: python3-pytest - Simple powerful testing with Python

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1294856



--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System  ---
python3-pytest-2.8.5-2.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-27a0a9c2cb

-- 
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 1295255] Review Request: php-container-interop - Promoting the interoperability of container objects (DIC, SL, etc.)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295255



--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System  ---
php-container-interop-1.1.0-1.el7, php-di-5.2.0-1.el7,
php-di-invoker-1.2.0-1.el7, php-di-phpdoc-reader-2.0.1-1.el7,
php-di-symfony2-bridge-1.1.0-1.el7, php-mnapoli-phpunit-easymock-0.2.1-1.el7
has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing repository. If problems still
persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-2cc24c1200

-- 
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 1295152] Review Request: python-wcwidth - Measures number of Terminal column cells of wide-character codes

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295152



--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-wcwidth-0.1.5-2.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-0ade95e6f5

-- 
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 1289070] Review Request: aobook - Aozora Bunko text viewer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1289070

Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||zbys...@in.waw.pl



--- Comment #1 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
Can you extend the description to give a hint what this package does and why
would one want to install it (over other text viewers)?

-- 
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 1265685] Review Request: sylfilter -- a Bayesian spam filter for mailers

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1265685

Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||zbys...@in.waw.pl



--- Comment #26 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
(In reply to Ralf Corsepius from comment #17)
> (In reply to Ranjan Maitra from comment #16)
> > (In reply to Ralf Corsepius from comment #15)
> > > Open issues with *-2:
> > > * [MUSTFIX] Not building against external sylpheed
> > > - Missing "BuildRequires: sylpheed-devel"
> > > - Pass --with-libsylph=sylpheed instead of --with-libsylph=builtin
> > >   to %configure
> > 
> > Why is this a MUSTFIX?
> To put it bluntly: because bundling is harmful, stupid and dumb.
> 
> Less bluntly: bundling renders packages unmaintainable, vulnerable and
> causes bloat.

To expand a bit on this, because Ranjan is a new packager, and is most likely
not aware of the long history of this topic ;):

Bundling used to be totally forbidden, with exceptions reluctantly granted
by the Fedora Packaging Committee. This policy was recently relaxed [1,2],
but bundling is still best avoided [3]. When the bundled library is already
packaged, it is required to use the system-wide copy:
"All packages whose upstreams allow them to be built against system libraries
must be built against system libraries."

The old policy [4] explains why bundling is bad. Please note that those
considerations are still valid, and the policy was only relaxed because
people were tired of fighting with unreasonable upstreams and massive
amounts of bundled code in some projects.

[1] https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1483
[2] https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1491
[3]
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Bundling_and_Duplication_of_system_libraries
[4]
https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries=406058

> > Building against sylpheed will mean requiring the
> > package for installation. It reduces the package size from 91k to 46k which
> > is not much, however, requiring sylpheed for someone who does not intend to
> > use sylpheed for this purpose would increase his/her pulled-in RPM size by
> > 7.8M (which is what sylpheed's RPM is).
> Size-wise bundling causes bloat because each statically linked packages
> re-adds the same libraries over and over again.

With today's disks, extra 8MB in files on disk is really unimportant.
Even if sylpheed is installed, nothing is run by default, so apart from
a bit of disk space this doesn't cause any problems. So even if the libs*
are *not* split out, it would be totally fine for sylfilter package to pull
in sylpheed.

Of course it is nice to split out libs* and avoid this bit
of bloat, but it's not that much of an issue, and no reason to hold up
the review. Currently sylpheed.rpm provides libsylph-0.so.1()(64bit),
and rpm will automatically generate a dependency on this in sylfilter.rpm.
If/when libs* are split out, this dependency will be satisfied by the
libs* subpackage. That's all.

-- 
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 1295152] Review Request: python-wcwidth - Measures number of Terminal column cells of wide-character codes

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295152

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-wcwidth-0.1.5-2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-af0dbd1d66

-- 
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 1295255] Review Request: php-container-interop - Promoting the interoperability of container objects (DIC, SL, etc.)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295255

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|CLOSED  |ON_QA
 Resolution|RAWHIDE |---
   Keywords||Reopened



--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System  ---
php-container-interop-1.1.0-1.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-63cd5fa5f4

-- 
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 1295154] Review Request: python-prompt_toolkit - Library for building powerful interactive command lines in Python

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295154

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-prompt_toolkit-0.52-2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-d0a73e9a0f

-- 
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 1287756] Review Request: copy-jdk-configs - JDK config files copier

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1287756

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #31 from Fedora Update System  ---
copy-jdk-configs-1.1-3.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-aa6237387c

-- 
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 1295257] Review Request: php-di-invoker - Generic and extensible callable invoker

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295257
Bug 1295257 depends on bug 1295255, which changed state.

Bug 1295255 Summary: Review Request: php-container-interop - Promoting the 
interoperability of container objects (DIC, SL, etc.)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295255

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|CLOSED  |ON_QA
 Resolution|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 1295258] Review Request: php-di - The dependency injection container for humans

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295258
Bug 1295258 depends on bug 1295255, which changed state.

Bug 1295255 Summary: Review Request: php-container-interop - Promoting the 
interoperability of container objects (DIC, SL, etc.)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295255

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|CLOSED  |ON_QA
 Resolution|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 1273579] Review Request: nest - The neural simulation tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1273579



--- Comment #14 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
(In reply to Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) from comment #13)
> (In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #12)
> > (In reply to Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) from comment #11)
> > > I'm happy to continue the review if another reviewer comes along,
> > I don't understand this sentence. Raphael said that he can review the
> > package in comment #8. If he cannot do it, I'm sure that somebody else (e.g.
> > me) would step up.
> 
> Oh, he dropped the review after I asked his opinion about the build system
> change in comment 9 which I took as an indication that he agreed with me
> putting off the package (He isn't the assignee any more, and he isn't in the
> CC list either) :)
Was he ever? I only see comment #8 from him.
Anyway, like I said, I can review the package.

> > > but I do
> > > think a re-review will be in order (even if unofficially) if the build
> > > system and change. 
> > Nah, the build system is not visible in the binary package. As long as it
> > builds nobody cares (except the maintainer of course).
> 
> That is what I meant - when a new build system comes, the entire package has
> to be effectively redone, and nest, as you'll see from the spec, isn't the
> simplest of packages. Totally a maintainers burden, yes, but I'm going to be
> the maintainer ;)
True. I doesn't seem so bad to me (about normal for an mpi package in fact :)),
but of course I can't and don't want to push you.

> > > Is the plan to get all the neuroscience packages into Fedora by F24, 
> > > though
> > > - or can we have a "group copr" thing running and transition packages over
> > > as they pass review?
> > 
> > I don't think there's a plan to get "all" neuroscience packages into Fedora,
> > there's probably too many to even consider that.
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NeuroFedora doesn't have a specific
> > list. New packages can be added at any time, and there's quite a bit of time
> > before Fedora 24 release (2016-05-17). I don't know about any plans to have
> > a group copr. I see coprs as a good mechanism to provide alternative
> > versions of already packaged software, or often updated software, or things
> > which are inappropriate for main Fedora for other reasons. I don't think
> > nest or other science related software falls into any of those categories,
> > and making a "detour" through copr would be mostly a waste of time.
> 
> I think the list is somewhere on a google spreadsheet. I don't have the link
> handy at the moment.
I wasn't aware of that. I know there's
http://taiga.fedorainfracloud.org/project/ignatenkobrain-neurofedora/kanban
but probably not everything is on there.

> Coprs are also a good mechanism for packages that build and are functional
> but are not packaged well enough to pass a formal review yet (outer ring in
> fedora.next and all that), which is exactly what the nest package is at the
> moment.
In my experience, it's quite easy for coprs to get obsolete. If the package
is in Fedora proper, than at least it will be regularly rebuilt, sometimes
a provenpackager will do a drive-by fix of some small issue, and users can
report issues in bugzilla, crashes are colleted. I think coprs are great
for development, or for a small focuses group of users, but after using them
for a while, I'm starting to see downsides of using them as a mechanism for
distributing software to a diverse group of users, over long time.

> Anyway, I'm happy to continue the review if someone takes it up. I'll update
> the spec with Raphael's comments later this week. I already updated the copr
> package to 2.10 which came out recently. I need to work on the python3 bit
> etc.

Great! Let's see if Raphael wants to pick up the review. If not, I'll take 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 1295154] Review Request: python-prompt_toolkit - Library for building powerful interactive command lines in Python

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295154



--- Comment #12 from Fabio Alessandro Locati  ---
@Terje: This package has a very rapid release cycle (the 0.55 was release on
03/01/2016, 0.56 on 03/01/2016 - yes, same day - and 0.57 on 04/01/2016). I've
noticed that many applications have problems with 0.53+ (it seems like they
broke some API between 0.52 and 0.53). I'll work on aws-cli to make it working
properly on 0.57. IIRC, mycli required 0.42+ so it's also broken by the 0.53
release. I'll take a look at mycli too to see if I can help to make it work on
0.57 (hopeing it will last as last stable for at least a week).

-- 
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 1283296] Review Request: pam-u2f - PAM authentication over U2F

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1283296



--- Comment #16 from Georg Sauthoff  ---
I've tested it on Fedora 23 and it doesn't work with SELinux set to enforce
(the default setting).

Only after executing

semanage permissive -a local_login_t

the module worked.

Also, a Fedora specific README would be helpful - i.e. one where it is
described what files you have to change in what way.

For example, I wanted to configure U2F as 2nd factor in addition to password
authentication - for locale console logins and gnome shell (including unlocking
a locked screen). I've managed to do that via adding this line before the `auth
... pasword-auth` line in /etc/pam.d/{login,gdm-password}:

auth requisite pam_u2f.so debug authfile=/etc/u2f_mappings interactive

(and filling /etc/u2f_mappings with output from pamu2fcfg)

In addition to that, the Fedora README could also mention pamu2fcfg.

More SELinux details:

The SELinux audit messages looked like this (before executing semanage
permissive):

type=AVC msg=audit(1452281803.756:2262): avc:  denied  { read } for  pid=11098
comm="login" name="c248:0" dev="tmpfs" ino=14836
scontext=system_u:system_r:local_login_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023
tcontext=system_u:object_r:udev_var_run_t:s0 tclass=file permissive=0
type=AVC msg=audit(1452281803.756:2263): avc:  denied  { read } for  pid=11098
comm="login" name="c248:1" dev="tmpfs" ino=14839
scontext=system_u:system_r:local_login_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023
tcontext=system_u:object_r:udev_var_run_t:s0 tclass=file permissive=0
type=AVC msg=audit(1452281803.757:2264): avc:  denied  { read } for  pid=11098
comm="login" name="c248:2" dev="tmpfs" ino=894548
scontext=system_u:system_r:local_login_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023
tcontext=system_u:object_r:udev_var_run_t:s0 tclass=file permissive=0
type=AVC msg=audit(1452281803.757:2265): avc:  denied  { read } for  pid=11098
comm="login" name="c248:3" dev="tmpfs" ino=895813
scontext=system_u:system_r:local_login_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023
tcontext=system_u:object_r:udev_var_run_t:s0 tclass=file permissive=0
type=AVC msg=audit(1452281803.758:2266): avc:  denied  { read } for  pid=11098
comm="login" name="c248:4" dev="tmpfs" ino=894573
scontext=system_u:system_r:local_login_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023
tcontext=system_u:object_r:udev_var_run_t:s0 tclass=file permissive=0
type=AVC msg=audit(1452281803.758:2267): avc:  denied  { read } for  pid=11098
comm="login" name="c248:5" dev="tmpfs" ino=910340
scontext=system_u:system_r:local_login_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023
tcontext=system_u:object_r:udev_var_run_t:s0 tclass=file permissive=0
type=AVC msg=audit(1452281803.759:2268): avc:  denied  { read } for  pid=11098
comm="login" name="c248:6" dev="tmpfs" ino=908284
scontext=system_u:system_r:local_login_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023
tcontext=system_u:object_r:udev_var_run_t:s0 tclass=file permissive=0


The tool audit2allow suggests:

#= local_login_t ==
allow local_login_t udev_var_run_t:file read;

-- 
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 1295127] Review Request: awscli - Universal Command Line Environment for AWS

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295127

Antonio Trande  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|anto.tra...@gmail.com
  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 1295258] Review Request: php-di - The dependency injection container for humans

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295258
Bug 1295258 depends on bug 1295256, which changed state.

Bug 1295256 Summary: Review Request: php-di-phpdoc-reader - Parses @var and 
@param values in PHP docblocks
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295256

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|CLOSED  |ON_QA
 Resolution|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 1295259] Review Request: php-di-symfony2-bridge - PHP-DI integration with Symfony 2

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295259

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System  ---
php-container-interop-1.1.0-1.el7, php-di-5.2.0-1.el7,
php-di-invoker-1.2.0-1.el7, php-di-phpdoc-reader-2.0.1-1.el7,
php-di-symfony2-bridge-1.1.0-1.el7, php-mnapoli-phpunit-easymock-0.2.1-1.el7
has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing repository. If problems still
persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-2cc24c1200

-- 
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 1287756] Review Request: copy-jdk-configs - JDK config files copier

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1287756



--- Comment #32 from Fedora Update System  ---
copy-jdk-configs-1.1-3.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-4ee40e04b9

-- 
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 1295259] Review Request: php-di-symfony2-bridge - PHP-DI integration with Symfony 2

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295259
Bug 1295259 depends on bug 1295258, which changed state.

Bug 1295258 Summary: Review Request: php-di - The dependency injection 
container for humans
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295258

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|CLOSED  |ON_QA
 Resolution|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 1296884] Review Request: perl-Test-Regexp - Test your regular expressions

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1296884



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-Test-Regexp-2015110201-2.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-1a86026b76

-- 
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 1295257] Review Request: php-di-invoker - Generic and extensible callable invoker

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295257

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|CLOSED  |ON_QA
 Resolution|RAWHIDE |---
   Keywords||Reopened



--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System  ---
php-container-interop-1.1.0-1.el7, php-di-5.2.0-1.el7,
php-di-invoker-1.2.0-1.el7, php-di-phpdoc-reader-2.0.1-1.el7,
php-di-symfony2-bridge-1.1.0-1.el7, php-mnapoli-phpunit-easymock-0.2.1-1.el7
has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing repository. If problems still
persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-2cc24c1200

-- 
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 1295258] Review Request: php-di - The dependency injection container for humans

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295258

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|CLOSED  |ON_QA
 Resolution|RAWHIDE |---
   Keywords||Reopened



--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System  ---
php-container-interop-1.1.0-1.el7, php-di-5.2.0-1.el7,
php-di-invoker-1.2.0-1.el7, php-di-phpdoc-reader-2.0.1-1.el7,
php-di-symfony2-bridge-1.1.0-1.el7, php-mnapoli-phpunit-easymock-0.2.1-1.el7
has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing repository. If problems still
persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-2cc24c1200

-- 
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 1295258] Review Request: php-di - The dependency injection container for humans

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295258
Bug 1295258 depends on bug 1295260, which changed state.

Bug 1295260 Summary: Review Request: php-mnapoli-phpunit-easymock - Helpers to 
build PHPUnit mocks
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295260

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|CLOSED  |ON_QA
 Resolution|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 1295258] Review Request: php-di - The dependency injection container for humans

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295258
Bug 1295258 depends on bug 1295257, which changed state.

Bug 1295257 Summary: Review Request: php-di-invoker - Generic and extensible 
callable invoker
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295257

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|CLOSED  |ON_QA
 Resolution|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 1295260] Review Request: php-mnapoli-phpunit-easymock - Helpers to build PHPUnit mocks

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295260

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|CLOSED  |ON_QA
 Resolution|RAWHIDE |---
   Keywords||Reopened



--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System  ---
php-container-interop-1.1.0-1.el7, php-di-5.2.0-1.el7,
php-di-invoker-1.2.0-1.el7, php-di-phpdoc-reader-2.0.1-1.el7,
php-di-symfony2-bridge-1.1.0-1.el7, php-mnapoli-phpunit-easymock-0.2.1-1.el7
has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing repository. If problems still
persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-2cc24c1200

-- 
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 1295154] Review Request: python-prompt_toolkit - Library for building powerful interactive command lines in Python

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295154



--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-prompt_toolkit-0.52-2.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-f625ee2ba5

-- 
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 1295256] Review Request: php-di-phpdoc-reader - Parses @var and @param values in PHP docblocks

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295256

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|CLOSED  |ON_QA
 Resolution|RAWHIDE |---
   Keywords||Reopened



--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System  ---
php-container-interop-1.1.0-1.el7, php-di-5.2.0-1.el7,
php-di-invoker-1.2.0-1.el7, php-di-phpdoc-reader-2.0.1-1.el7,
php-di-symfony2-bridge-1.1.0-1.el7, php-mnapoli-phpunit-easymock-0.2.1-1.el7
has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing repository. If problems still
persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-2cc24c1200

-- 
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 1292209] Review Request: python-nsdf - Support library for the Neuroscience Simulation Data Format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1292209



--- Comment #10 from William Moreno  ---
Did you check your koji build?

Your are using many python3 conditionals but you do not define what does this
conditional means so you are only building a python2 subpackage.

You can get the license file from upstream:
https://github.com/nsdf/nsdf/blob/master/LICENSE

Open a issue upstream requesting to include the LICENSE text in the tarball,
you can patch the license file so GLPv3 requires to provide a copy of the
license text.

-- 
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 1292209] Review Request: python-nsdf - Support library for the Neuroscience Simulation Data Format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1292209



--- Comment #12 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
(In reply to William Moreno from comment #10)
> Did you check your koji build?
> 
> Your are using many python3 conditionals but you do not define what does
> this conditional means so you are only building a python2 subpackage.
Yes, this is on purpose. Upstream only supports python2, package needs porting
to python3. There's *was* a macro at the top of the spec file '%global
with_python3 0', but without any comment. I added the comment now, and opened
an issue upstream: https://github.com/nsdf/nsdf/issues/42.

> You can get the license file from upstream:
> https://github.com/nsdf/nsdf/blob/master/LICENSE
Yes, they merged my pull request yesterday ;)

> Open a issue upstream requesting to include the LICENSE text in the tarball,
> you can patch the license file so GLPv3 requires to provide a copy of the
> license text.
Already done and merged:
https://github.com/nsdf/nsdf/commit/466c2a3f3ada

(In reply to William Moreno from comment #11)
> Package Review
> ==
> [!]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
Should be fixed now.

Thanks for the review!

Spec URL: https://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/python-nsdf.spec
SRPM URL:
https://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/python-nsdf-0.0-2.git9621ced.fc24.src.rpm

* Fri Jan  8 2016 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  -
0.0-2.git9621ced
- Update to latest git snapshot
- Add LICENSE to %%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 1295154] Review Request: python-prompt_toolkit - Library for building powerful interactive command lines in Python

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295154



--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-prompt_toolkit-0.57-1.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL
7. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-5f48cdcb92

-- 
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 1295152] Review Request: python-wcwidth - Measures number of Terminal column cells of wide-character codes

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295152



--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-wcwidth-0.1.6-1.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-fca79c0f1b

-- 
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 1295152] Review Request: python-wcwidth - Measures number of Terminal column cells of wide-character codes

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295152

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |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 1294278] Review Request: python-usbtmc - Python implementation of the USBTMC protocol

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1294278



--- Comment #2 from William Moreno  ---
Package Review
==
This package do not look bad but the epel6 build fails due a a missing pyusb
dependency. You can go for epel7 and Fedora so you can clean the spec for
conditionals about http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1247

Also in Fedora and Epel7 you can use %py2_build, py2_install, py3_build and
py3_install

This way you can clean than the spec for epel7 and Fedora.

The doc directoy is a python-sphinx documentation than can build to html and
include in docs.

Also looks like upstream is using MIT and not BSD as license
https://github.com/python-ivi/python-usbtmc/blob/master/COPYING
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:MIT#Modern_Style_with_sublicense

= MUST items =
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.
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: 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]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. 
[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: No rpmlint messages.
[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 %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[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]: Dist tag is present.
[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 does not use a name that already exists.
[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]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
 process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
 provide egg info.
[!]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep

= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[x]: 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.
 Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
 python3-usbtmc , python-usbtmc-doc
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
 translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
 architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try 

[Bug 1292209] Review Request: python-nsdf - Support library for the Neuroscience Simulation Data Format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1292209



--- Comment #14 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
Thank you.

-- 
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 1295127] Review Request: awscli - Universal Command Line Environment for AWS

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295127



--- Comment #7 from Fabio Alessandro Locati  ---
In the mean time, I prepared an updated version with the first bullet solved
and the last upstream version:

Spec URL: https://fale.fedorapeople.org/aws/awscli.spec
SRPM URL: https://fale.fedorapeople.org/aws/awscli-1.9.17-1.fc23.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 1295549] Review Request: qt5-qtwebengine - Qt5 - QtWebEngine components

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295549



--- Comment #14 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/qt5-qtwebengine

-- 
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 1292209] Review Request: python-nsdf - Support library for the Neuroscience Simulation Data Format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1292209



--- Comment #15 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/python-nsdf

-- 
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 1295549] Review Request: qt5-qtwebengine - Qt5 - QtWebEngine components

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295549

Rex Dieter  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #12 from Rex Dieter  ---
Thanks for the heroic effort here, approved.

-- 
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 1293156] Review Request: lxqt-sudo - GUI frontend for sudo/su

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1293156



--- Comment #2 from William Moreno  ---
Package Review
==

Issues:
===
- Package installs properly.
  Note: Installation errors (see attachment)
  See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines

- The spec from the url is not the same of the src.rpm.

- You should own these directories:
[!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
 Note: No known owner of /usr/share/lxqt/translations/lxqt-sudo
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/lxqt/translations
 /lxqt-sudo

= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[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.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[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.
[x]: 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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[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 %license.
[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]: Dist tag is present.
[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 does not use a name that already exists.
[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]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: 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.
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
 justified.
[x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
 translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
 architectures.
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
 files.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: Reviewer should 

[Bug 1292209] Review Request: python-nsdf - Support library for the Neuroscience Simulation Data Format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1292209



--- Comment #11 from William Moreno  ---
Package Review
==
[!]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.

This package looks good but I can not aprove it if you dont remove the
conditionals and build the python3 subpackage.A

= MUST items =

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.
[-]: 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 %license.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[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.
[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]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. 
[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: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[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]: Dist tag is present.
[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 does not use a name that already exists.
[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]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
 process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
 provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[x]: 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.
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
 justified.
[x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
 translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
 architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
 files.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro.
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.

[Bug 1295154] Review Request: python-prompt_toolkit - Library for building powerful interactive command lines in Python

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295154

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |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 1295154] Review Request: python-prompt_toolkit - Library for building powerful interactive command lines in Python

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295154



--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-prompt_toolkit-0.57-1.el6 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL
6. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-41f6e461a2

-- 
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 1292209] Review Request: python-nsdf - Support library for the Neuroscience Simulation Data Format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1292209

William Moreno  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #13 from William Moreno  ---
Package Aproved
===

-- 
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 1295549] Review Request: qt5-qtwebengine - Qt5 - QtWebEngine components

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295549



--- Comment #13 from Kevin Kofler  ---
Wow, thanks! I requested the package creation through pkgdb.

-- 
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 1295154] Review Request: python-prompt_toolkit - Library for building powerful interactive command lines in Python

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295154



--- Comment #16 from Fabio Alessandro Locati  ---
Good point.

I'll update it tomorow since:
- mycli has been upgraded from prompt_toolkit 0.4x to 0.57 without any line of
code change then the problem in aws-cli is (at least partially)
- mycli is already been approved, aws-shell has some time before it can be
packaged so it can be improved in upstream

-- 
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 1295127] Review Request: awscli - Universal Command Line Environment for AWS

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295127



--- Comment #4 from Fabio Alessandro Locati  ---
Thanks Andrea,
just few comments now and then tomorrow morning I'll work on the spec itself.

1. Ok, I'll do this way, thanks

2. This package does not provide any library, only binaries so (as for
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Executables_in_.2Fusr.2Fbin, "If
the executables provide the same functionality independent of whether they are
run on top of Python 2 or Python 3, then only one version of the executable
should be packaged.") I think only one version should be packaged

3. See point 2

4. Technically, AWSCLI does not require bash nor zsh so they should not be a
dependency. Those helpers are used only if AWSCLI is used with BASH or ZSH.
This is a common thing in fact even if you do not have zsh installed (as in my
computer) that folder is present

Thanks a lot,
Fabio

-- 
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 1291877] Review Request: python-nilearn - Python module for fast and easy statistical learning on NeuroImaging data

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1291877



--- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring 
 ---
williamjmorenor's scratch build of python-nilearn-0.2.1-1.fc24.src.rpm for f23
completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12471899

-- 
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 1295127] Review Request: awscli - Universal Command Line Environment for AWS

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295127



--- Comment #6 from Fabio Alessandro Locati  ---
(In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #5)
> (In reply to Fabio Alessandro Locati from comment #4)
> > Thanks Andrea,
> > just few comments now and then tomorrow morning I'll work on the spec 
> > itself.
> > 
> > 1. Ok, I'll do this way, thanks
> > 
> > 2. This package does not provide any library, only binaries so (as for
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Executables_in_.2Fusr.2Fbin,
> > "If the executables provide the same functionality independent of whether
> > they are run on top of Python 2 or Python 3, 
> > t/var/lib/mock/fedora-23-x86_64/resulthen only one version of the
> > executable should be packaged.") I think only one version should be packaged
> > 
> > 3. See point 2
> 
> I'm not totally sure; I'm not a Python expert, but I see awcli file in
> /usr/bin as is made with your package contains a Python3 shebang (indeed,
> your package builds only a Python3 awscli in Fedora).
> 
> When you will split awscli in python2-awscli and python3-awscli, it will
> need two different awscli in /usr/bin, one for Python2 and one for Python3.

This would never happens as for specifics.
If you think about it, there a multiple softwares like ansible, dnf and so on
that are written in python and could (potentially) be compiled as py2 and py3
binaries, but it does not mak any sense from a Fedora infrastructure since the
user can care less if the program that is using is executed by py2 or py3 (and
probably does not know and care if it is a python, perl, c, assemply program as
well).
As for the package naming, it's the same case. In fact the ansible package is
called simply "ansible" (and not python2-ansible) as well as dnf is "dnf" (and
not python3-dnf), yum is "yum" (and not python2-yum) and so one.

> > 
> > 4. Technically, AWSCLI does not require bash nor zsh so they should not be a
> > dependency. Those helpers are used only if AWSCLI is used with BASH or ZSH.
> > This is a common thing in fact even if you do not have zsh installed (as in
> > my computer) that folder is present
> > 
> 
> They may be packaged separately so, as 'awscli-bash-completion' and
> 'awscli-zsh'.

If you take the dnf package as an example
(pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/dnf.git/tree/dnf.spec) they just recommended
the installation of bash-completion in line 84. Other packages (like fedpkg
http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/fedpkg.git/tree/fedpkg.spec) don't
bother of recommend any bash-completion line.
Now, I don't know what would be the best way to approach this (it's my first
time with this those bash completion things and I have not found any
documentation) so I would think that the DNF approach is the more "safe" since
a recommend is not a hard requirement but it's still a notice.

Thanks a lot

-- 
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 1294904] Review Request: python-rpm-macros - The unversioned Python RPM macros

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1294904

Antonio Trande  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #12 from Antonio Trande  ---
Package approved.

-- 
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 1288645] Review Request: teem - Libraries for scientific raster data processing and visualizing

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1288645

Dmitry Mikhirev  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841
[Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a
sponsor
-- 
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 1062049] Review Request: rubygem-rinku - Autolinking for Ruby

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062049



--- Comment #5 from Ken Dreyer  ---
New version with some cleanups:

* Fri Jan 08 2016 Ken Dreyer  - 1.7.3-4
- Drop macros for Fedora 20 (now EOL)
- Switch to %%autosetup macro
- Drop unneeded %%license definition

Exact changes in Git:
https://fedorapeople.org/cgit/ktdreyer/public_git/rubygem-rinku.git/commit/?id=4cd38d35732ba9f6b9fd48913c853cb2eb9d2110

Spec URL:
https://fedorapeople.org/cgit/ktdreyer/public_git/rubygem-rinku.git/plain/rubygem-rinku.spec
SRPM URL:
https://ktdreyer.fedorapeople.org/reviews/rubygem-rinku-1.7.3-4.fc24.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 1288645] Review Request: teem - Libraries for scientific raster data processing and visualizing

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1288645



--- Comment #3 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
Created attachment 1112962
  --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1112962=edit
build failure on x86_64

-- 
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 1296884] New: Review Request: perl-Test-Regexp - Test your regular expressions

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1296884

Bug ID: 1296884
   Summary: Review Request: perl-Test-Regexp - Test your regular
expressions
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: p...@city-fan.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL:
http://subversion.city-fan.org/repos/cfo-repo/perl-Test-Regexp/branches/fedora/perl-Test-Regexp.spec
SRPM URL:
http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/perl-Test-Regexp/perl-Test-Regexp-2015110201-2.fc24.src.rpm

Description:
This module is intended to test your regular expressions. Given a subject
string and a regular expression (a.k.a. pattern), the module not only tests
whether the regular expression completely matches the subject string, it
performs a utf8::upgrade or utf8::downgrade on the subject string and
performs the tests again, if necessary. Furthermore, given a pattern with
capturing parenthesis, it checks whether all captures are present, and in the
right order. Both named and unnamed captures are checked.

Fedora Account System Username: pghmcfc

-- 
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 1296884] Review Request: perl-Test-Regexp - Test your regular expressions

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1296884

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||jples...@redhat.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jples...@redhat.com
  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 1296901] New: Review Request: php-mcnetic-zipstreamer - Stream zip files without i/o overhead

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1296901

Bug ID: 1296901
   Summary: Review Request: php-mcnetic-zipstreamer - Stream zip
files without i/o overhead
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: fed...@famillecollet.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/remicollet/remirepo/22d5f18c5b41c7d4792b54dc112cf8027cc26cdc/php/php-mcnetic-zipstreamer/php-mcnetic-zipstreamer.spec
SRPM URL:
http://rpms.famillecollet.com/SRPMS/php-mcnetic-zipstreamer-1.7-1.remi.src.rpm
Description: 
Simple Class to create zip files on the fly and stream directly to the
HTTP client as the content is added (without using temporary files).

Autoloader: /usr/share/php/ZipStreamer/autoload.php


Fedora Account System Username: remi

--
Notices:
- Dependency of owncloud.
- as usually, I will cleanup EL-5 stuff after import.

-- 
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 1296901] Review Request: php-mcnetic-zipstreamer - Stream zip files without i/o overhead

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1296901

Remi Collet  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Alias||mcnetic/zipstreamer



-- 
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 1296901] Review Request: php-mcnetic-zipstreamer - Stream zip files without i/o overhead

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1296901

Remi Collet  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1262185




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1262185
[Bug 1262185] ownCloud bundles all kinds of crap (patchwork, punic, forks
of smb4php and phpzipstreamer)
-- 
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 1234210] Review Request: pdf-stapler - tool for manipulating PDF documents from the command line

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234210

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|MODIFIED



--- Comment #47 from Fedora Update System  ---
pdf-stapler-0.3.3-5.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-aa0c4facc9

-- 
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 1234210] Review Request: pdf-stapler - tool for manipulating PDF documents from the command line

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234210



--- Comment #47 from Fedora Update System  ---
pdf-stapler-0.3.3-5.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-aa0c4facc9

-- 
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 1293156] Review Request: lxqt-sudo - GUI frontend for sudo/su

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1293156



--- Comment #3 from Upstream Release Monitoring 
 ---
williamjmorenor's scratch build of lxqt-sudo-0.10.0-1.fc23.src.rpm for rawhide
completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12471682

-- 
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 1295127] Review Request: awscli - Universal Command Line Environment for AWS

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295127



--- Comment #5 from Antonio Trande  ---
(In reply to Fabio Alessandro Locati from comment #4)
> Thanks Andrea,
> just few comments now and then tomorrow morning I'll work on the spec itself.
> 
> 1. Ok, I'll do this way, thanks
> 
> 2. This package does not provide any library, only binaries so (as for
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Executables_in_.2Fusr.2Fbin,
> "If the executables provide the same functionality independent of whether
> they are run on top of Python 2 or Python 3, then only one version of the
> executable should be packaged.") I think only one version should be packaged
> 
> 3. See point 2

I'm not totally sure; I'm not a Python expert, but I see awcli file in /usr/bin
as is made with your package contains a Python3 shebang (indeed, your package
builds only a Python3 awscli in Fedora).

When you will split awscli in python2-awscli and python3-awscli, it will need
two different awscli in /usr/bin, one for Python2 and one for Python3.

> 
> 4. Technically, AWSCLI does not require bash nor zsh so they should not be a
> dependency. Those helpers are used only if AWSCLI is used with BASH or ZSH.
> This is a common thing in fact even if you do not have zsh installed (as in
> my computer) that folder is present
> 

They may be packaged separately so, as 'awscli-bash-completion' and
'awscli-zsh'.

-- 
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 1294278] Review Request: python-usbtmc - Python implementation of the USBTMC protocol

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1294278



--- Comment #1 from Upstream Release Monitoring 
 ---
williamjmorenor's scratch build of python-usbtmc-0.6-1.fc23.src.rpm for epel7
completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12472212

-- 
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 1296884] Review Request: perl-Test-Regexp - Test your regular expressions

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1296884



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
perl-Test-Regexp-2015110201-2.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-a6a913f86e

-- 
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 1295154] Review Request: python-prompt_toolkit - Library for building powerful interactive command lines in Python

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295154

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-prompt_toolkit-0.52-2.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-0a364f14aa

-- 
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 1295152] Review Request: python-wcwidth - Measures number of Terminal column cells of wide-character codes

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295152

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-wcwidth-0.1.5-2.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-b739c3d32e

-- 
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 1295152] Review Request: python-wcwidth - Measures number of Terminal column cells of wide-character codes

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295152



--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-wcwidth-0.1.5-2.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-a4a5d84d5e

-- 
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 1294666] Review Request: python-sql - Python library to write SQL queries

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1294666



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-sql-0.8-2.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-56729e5356

-- 
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 1295260] Review Request: php-mnapoli-phpunit-easymock - Helpers to build PHPUnit mocks

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295260



--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System  ---
php-container-interop-1.1.0-1.fc23, php-di-5.2.0-1.fc23,
php-di-invoker-1.2.0-1.fc23, php-di-phpdoc-reader-2.0.1-1.fc23,
php-di-symfony2-bridge-1.1.0-1.fc23, php-mnapoli-phpunit-easymock-0.2.1-1.fc23
has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository. If problems still persist,
please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-24c3e6b59c

-- 
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 1295257] Review Request: php-di-invoker - Generic and extensible callable invoker

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295257



--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System  ---
php-container-interop-1.1.0-1.fc23, php-di-5.2.0-1.fc23,
php-di-invoker-1.2.0-1.fc23, php-di-phpdoc-reader-2.0.1-1.fc23,
php-di-symfony2-bridge-1.1.0-1.fc23, php-mnapoli-phpunit-easymock-0.2.1-1.fc23
has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository. If problems still persist,
please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-24c3e6b59c

-- 
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 1292272] Review Request: nodm - A display manager automatically starting an X session

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1292272

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System  ---
nodm-0.11-2.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-a0a434f1fe

-- 
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 1295255] Review Request: php-container-interop - Promoting the interoperability of container objects (DIC, SL, etc.)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295255



--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System  ---
php-container-interop-1.1.0-1.fc23, php-di-5.2.0-1.fc23,
php-di-invoker-1.2.0-1.fc23, php-di-phpdoc-reader-2.0.1-1.fc23,
php-di-symfony2-bridge-1.1.0-1.fc23, php-mnapoli-phpunit-easymock-0.2.1-1.fc23
has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository. If problems still persist,
please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-24c3e6b59c

-- 
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 1295258] Review Request: php-di - The dependency injection container for humans

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295258



--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System  ---
php-container-interop-1.1.0-1.fc23, php-di-5.2.0-1.fc23,
php-di-invoker-1.2.0-1.fc23, php-di-phpdoc-reader-2.0.1-1.fc23,
php-di-symfony2-bridge-1.1.0-1.fc23, php-mnapoli-phpunit-easymock-0.2.1-1.fc23
has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository. If problems still persist,
please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-24c3e6b59c

-- 
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