[Bug 1370451] Review Request: nodejs-grunt-contrib-copy - Copy files and folders

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370451



--- Comment #2 from Matthias Runge  ---
thank you, I'm happy to add you as co-maintainer!

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1268380] Review Request: python-sphinx-bootstrap-theme - A sphinx theme that integrates the Bootstrap framework

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1268380



--- Comment #56 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-sphinx-bootstrap-theme-0.4.13-2.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25
stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this
bug report.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424890] New: Review Request: domterm - terminal emulator based on web technologies

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424890

Bug ID: 1424890
   Summary: Review Request: domterm - terminal emulator based on
web technologies
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: p...@bothner.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: http://per.bothner.com/DomTerm/domterm.spec
SRPM URL: http://per.bothner.com/DomTerm/domterm-0.71-1.fc25.src.rpm
Description: terminal emulator based on web technologies
Fedora Account System Username: bothner

I am the upstream maintain or this package (as well as long-time Fedora user).

Website: http://domterm.org
Source: https://github.com/PerBothner/DomTerm
An LWN article (about a year old) describing DomTerm:
https://lwn.net/Articles/670062/

Note I had some problems with "domterm" vs "DomTerm".  For example the command
'fedpkg --release f25 mockbuild' didn't work because it looks for
DomTerm-0.71-1.fc25.src.rpm.  However, fedora-review and other tests passed.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1394614] Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-topicons-plus - Move all legacy tray icons to the top panel

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394614

terrycloth  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Version|24  |25



--- Comment #4 from terrycloth  ---
fedora-review looks good to me, except that it still complains about
glib-schemas:

  Issues:
  ===
  - glib-compile-schemas is run in %postun and %posttrans if package has
*.gschema.xml files.
Note: gschema file(s) in gnome-shell-extension-topicons-plus
See:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#GSettings_Schema

I still don't quite get what this is telling me. The `glib-compile-schemas`
appears only in the extension's Makefile's "build" target.

  https://github.com/phocean/TopIcons-plus/blob/master/Makefile

Is fedora-review saying that I'm supposed to remove the glib-compile-schemas
command?

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1415190] Review Request: python-onionbalance - Load-balancing for Tor onion services

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1415190



--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-onionbalance-0.1.6-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1268380] Review Request: python-sphinx-bootstrap-theme - A sphinx theme that integrates the Bootstrap framework

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1268380



--- Comment #55 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-sphinx-bootstrap-theme-0.4.13-2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6
stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this
bug report.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424871] Review Request: xplayer - A generic Media Player

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424871

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1359390
 Depends On||1424851 (xplayer-plparser)
  Alias||xplayer




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359390
[Bug 1359390] Cinnamon X-apps
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424851
[Bug 1424851] Review Request: xplayer-plparser - Xplayer playlist parser
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424851] Review Request: xplayer-plparser - Xplayer playlist parser

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424851

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1424871 (xplayer)




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424871
[Bug 1424871] Review Request: xplayer - A generic Media Player
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424871] New: Review Request: xplayer - A generic Media Player

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424871

Bug ID: 1424871
   Summary: Review Request: xplayer - A generic Media Player
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: besse...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Description:

  Xplayer is a generic media player.


Koji Build:

  No build.  Missing dependency (xplayer-plparser).


Issues:

  No known issues.  Some minor complains from rpmlint.


FAS-User:

  besser82


Urls:

  Spec URL: 
https://pagure.io/besser82/package-review/raw/master/f/xplayer.spec
  SRPM URL: 
https://pagure.io/besser82/package-review/raw/master/f/xplayer-1.2.2-0.1.fc26.src.rpm


Thanks for review in advance!

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424832] Review Request: xreader - Simple document viewer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424832



--- Comment #2 from Björn "besser82" Esser  ---
Fixed scratch-build:

  https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17960740

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424861] Review Request: python-hupper - Integrated process monitor for developing servers

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424861

Patrick Uiterwijk  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #2 from Patrick Uiterwijk  ---
Package is APPROVED.


Package Review
==

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



= 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.
[x]: 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.
[-]: 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. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 122880 bytes in 28 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]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
[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.
[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:
[-]: 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).
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[?]: Package functions as described.
[?]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: 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]: 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, 

[Bug 1424861] Review Request: python-hupper - Integrated process monitor for developing servers

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424861

Patrick Uiterwijk  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||puiterw...@redhat.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|puiterw...@redhat.com



--- Comment #1 from Patrick Uiterwijk  ---
I will do this review.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1394614] Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-topicons-plus - Move all legacy tray icons to the top panel

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394614



--- Comment #3 from terrycloth  ---
Updated to TopIcons Plus version 19.

gsettings command no longer needed, so glib2 is no longer a dependency.

Spec URL:
https://gitlab.com/terrycloth/packaging-gnome-shell-extension-topicons-plus/raw/master/gnome-shell-extension-topicons-plus.spec

SRPM URL:
https://andrew.tosk.in/tmp/gnome-shell-extension-topicons-plus-19-1.fc25.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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424861] New: Review Request: python-hupper - Integrated process monitor for developing servers

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424861

Bug ID: 1424861
   Summary: Review Request: python-hupper - Integrated process
monitor for developing servers
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: ke...@scrye.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL:
http://www.scrye.com/~kevin/fedora/review/python-hupper/python-hupper.spec
SRPM URL:
http://www.scrye.com/~kevin/fedora/review/python-hupper/python-hupper-0.4.2-1.fc26.src.rpm
Description: 
hupper is an integrated process monitor that will track changes
to any imported Python files in sys.modules as well as custom paths.
When files are changed the process is restarted.

Fedora Account System Username: kevin

rpmlint says: 

python2-hupper.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US sys -> says,
sis, syn
python2-hupper.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir
/usr/share/doc/python2-hupper/docs/_static/.keep
python2-hupper.noarch: E: zero-length
/usr/share/doc/python2-hupper/docs/_static/.keep
python2-hupper.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter
/usr/share/doc/python2-hupper/docs/conf.py /usr/bin/env python
python3-hupper.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US sys -> says,
sis, syn
python3-hupper.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir
/usr/share/doc/python3-hupper/docs/_static/.keep
python3-hupper.noarch: E: zero-length
/usr/share/doc/python3-hupper/docs/_static/.keep
python3-hupper.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter
/usr/share/doc/python3-hupper/docs/conf.py /usr/bin/env python
python3-hupper.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary hupper
python-hupper.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US sys -> says, sis,
syn
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 6 warnings.

koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17960251

I can't seem to get the python3 tests working, but I can fix that later with
upstreams help.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424859] Review Request: nodejs-encodeurl - Encode a URL to a percent-encoded form

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424859

Zuzana Svetlikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1424860




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424860
[Bug 1424860] Review Request: nodejs-finalhandler - Node.js final http
responder
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424860] Review Request: nodejs-finalhandler - Node.js final http responder

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424860

Zuzana Svetlikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||956806 (nodejs-reviews),
   ||1094699
 Depends On||1424859




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956806
[Bug 956806] Node.js Review Tracker
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1094699
[Bug 1094699] nodejs-connect-3.6.0 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424859
[Bug 1424859] Review Request: nodejs-encodeurl - Encode a URL to a
percent-encoded form
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424859] Review Request: nodejs-encodeurl - Encode a URL to a percent-encoded form

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424859

Zuzana Svetlikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||956806 (nodejs-reviews)




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956806
[Bug 956806] Node.js Review Tracker
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424860] New: Review Request: nodejs-finalhandler - Node.js final http responder

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424860

Bug ID: 1424860
   Summary: Review Request: nodejs-finalhandler - Node.js final
http responder
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: zsvet...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL:
https://fedorapeople.org/~zvetlik/nodejs/nodejs-finalhandler/nodejs-finalhandler.spec
SRPM URL:
https://fedorapeople.org/~zvetlik/nodejs/nodejs-finalhandler/nodejs-finalhandler-1.0.0-1.fc26.src.rpm
Description: Node.js final http responder
Fedora Account System Username: zvetlik

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424859] New: Review Request: nodejs-encodeurl - Encode a URL to a percent-encoded form

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424859

Bug ID: 1424859
   Summary: Review Request: nodejs-encodeurl - Encode a URL to a
percent-encoded form
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: zsvet...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL:
https://fedorapeople.org/~zvetlik/nodejs/nodejs-encodeurl/nodejs-encodeurl.spec
SRPM URL:
https://fedorapeople.org/~zvetlik/nodejs/nodejs-encodeurl/nodejs-encodeurl-1.0.1-1.fc26.src.rpm
Description: Encode a URL to a percent-encoded form, excluding already-encoded
sequences
Fedora Account System Username: zvetlik

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1268380] Review Request: python-sphinx-bootstrap-theme - A sphinx theme that integrates the Bootstrap framework

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1268380

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2017-02-19 17:47:28



--- Comment #54 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-sphinx-bootstrap-theme-0.4.13-2.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24
stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this
bug report.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424798] Review Request: xed - X-Apps [Text] Editor (Cross-DE, backward-compatible, GTK3, traditional UI)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424798



--- Comment #9 from Björn "besser82" Esser  ---
(In reply to Mario Blättermann from comment #7)
> Release:  0.3%{?dist}
> 
> What's the reason to use such a construction for the release number? I can't
> found anything in the guidelines [1] which applies to that.
> 
> [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:DistTag

I usually use 0.XY releases during review and bump to regular release-schema on
scm-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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424856] New: Review Request: comedilib - User space libraries for the Linux Control and Measurement Device Interface

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424856

Bug ID: 1424856
   Summary: Review Request: comedilib - User space libraries for
the Linux Control and Measurement Device Interface
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: daniel.naugh...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



The spec file and srpm can be found on COPR
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/dnaughton/comedilib/

Description: User Space libraries for the Linux Control and Measurement Device
Interface API from comedio.org
Fedora Account System Username: dnaughton

These libraries along with kernel modules in "comedi" package also under review
were in Fedora in 2008.  I would like to make then current to the latest files
on come.org and cleanup the rpm so it works on modern systems.  F24+ and RHEL7+

Thanks for reviewing.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424854] New: Review Request: comedi - Kernel Libraries and drivers for Linux Control and Measurement Interface API

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424854

Bug ID: 1424854
   Summary: Review Request: comedi - Kernel Libraries and drivers
for Linux Control and Measurement Interface API
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: daniel.naugh...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



The srpms can be found here on copr

https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/dnaughton/comedi/

Description: This rpm is the installation of the kernel modules and device
drivers for the linux Control and Measurement Device Interface from comedi.org.
 These drivers are useful for using the various data acquisition cards and USB
devices in linux.
Fedora Account System Username: dnaughton

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424851] Review Request: xplayer-plparser - Xplayer playlist parser

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424851

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1359390
  Alias||xplayer-plparser




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359390
[Bug 1359390] Cinnamon X-apps
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424851] New: Review Request: xplayer-plparser - Xplayer playlist parser

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424851

Bug ID: 1424851
   Summary: Review Request: xplayer-plparser - Xplayer playlist
parser
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: besse...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Description:

  Xplayer-pl-parser is a simple GObject-based library to
  parse a host of playlist formats, as well as save those.


Koji Build:

  https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17959739


Issues:

  No known issues.  Some minor complains from rpmlint.


FAS-User:

  besser82


Urls:

  Spec URL: 
https://pagure.io/besser82/package-review/raw/master/f/xplayer-plparser.spec
  SRPM URL: 
https://pagure.io/besser82/package-review/raw/master/f/xplayer-plparser-1.0.2-0.1.fc26.src.rpm


Thanks for review in advance!

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1422429] Review Request: python-junit_xml - python library to create junit compatible XML files

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1422429



--- Comment #3 from James Hogarth  ---
Thanks for the 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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1422429] Review Request: python-junit_xml - python library to create junit compatible XML files

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1422429

Kevin Fenzi  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #2 from Kevin Fenzi  ---
I don't see any blocking issues here. This package is APPROVED.

Package Review
==

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

= 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.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "Unknown or generated". 13 files have
 unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
 /home/fedora/kevin/1422429-python-junit_xml/licensecheck.txt
[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.
[-]: 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.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 2 files.
[-]: 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]: 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.
[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).
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
 Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
 python2-junit_xml , python3-junit_xml
[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 

[Bug 1422931] Review Request: EmptyEpsilon - Spaceship bridge simulator game

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1422931



--- Comment #3 from Michael Simacek  ---
I'm not a sponsor, this is just informal review.

Package Review
==
- scratch-build (failed):
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17950413
- There's a bundled font, it should be packaged spearately or replaced with
  a different font available in Fedora
- The licensing is a quite complex - there are assets which were taken
  from various 3rd party sources and have their own licensing terms, which are
  not always marked clearly in the tarball. You should do a full licensing
  review of them - identify licenses of each individual component, document
  your findings and reflect this in the License tag in the specfile.
- See:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main?rd=Licensing#SoftwareLicenses
- Some files under `packs` directory are non-free, they need to be removed from
the SRPM
- To do that you should make a script (name it generate-sources.sh) that
  will download upstream sources and repack them with problematic
  components removed. Then use such tarball as Source0 and add the script
  as Source1
- Please fix the rpmlint warnings (except the manpage, I think a game doesn't
need it)
- In order to be visible in Gnome Software Center and the like, it should ship
  an appdata file. See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:AppData
- Other comments inline in the review template


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


= MUST items =

C/C++:
[x]: Provides: bundled(gnulib) in place as required.
 Note: Sources not installed
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

Generic:
[!]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
- Non-free components need to be removed
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "SIL (v1.1)", "Unknown or generated". 659 files have unknown
 license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
 /home/msimacek/1422931-EmptyEpsilon/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
 Note: No known owner of /usr/share/emptyepsilon
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/emptyepsilon
[!]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
 Should use %cmake macros or pass the flags manually
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[!]: Changelog in prescribed format.
- the first line should end with version-release, not just release
[!]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[?]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
- Fedora generally uses lowercase package names, unless there is upstream
  preference for case sensitive name. I don't know upstream, so I'm leaving
  this up to you.
- See:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Naming?rd=Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Case_Sensitivity
[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.
[!]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
 - probably correct, but xclip not justified
 - I'd like to see a comment above and also justify why it's Recommends
and not Requires
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[!]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
- Doesn't build on ppc64[le]. I don't think anyone will be playing
  spaceship simulator on a mainframe, so using ExcludeArch should be fine.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 51200 bytes in 2 files.
[?]: 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]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
 license(s) in its own file, then that file, 

[Bug 1424798] Review Request: xed - X-Apps [Text] Editor (Cross-DE, backward-compatible, GTK3, traditional UI)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424798

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST



--- Comment #8 from Björn "besser82" Esser  ---
Thank you for the 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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424825] Review Request: xviewer - Fast and functional graphics viewer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424825

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST



--- Comment #7 from Björn "besser82" Esser  ---
Thank you for the 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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424839] New: Review Request: php-rmccue-requests - Requests for PHP is a humble HTTP request library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424839

Bug ID: 1424839
   Summary: Review Request: php-rmccue-requests - Requests for PHP
is a humble HTTP request library
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: ra...@electronsweatshop.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: https://bowlofeggs.fedorapeople.org/php-rmccue-requests.spec
SRPM URL:
https://bowlofeggs.fedorapeople.org/php-rmccue-requests-1.7.0-1.fc26.src.rpm
Description: Requests for PHP simplifies how you interact with other sites and
takes
away all your worries.

Requests is a HTTP library written in PHP, for human beings. It is
roughly based on the API from the excellent Requests Python library.
Requests is ISC Licensed (similar to the new BSD license) and has no
dependencies, except for PHP 5.2+.

Despite PHP's use as a language for the web, its tools for sending HTTP
requests are severely lacking. cURL has an interesting API, to say the
least, and you can't always rely on it being available. Sockets provide
only low level access, and require you to build most of the HTTP
response parsing yourself.

We all have better things to do. That's why Requests was born.
Fedora Account System Username: bowlofeggs

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424825] Review Request: xviewer - Fast and functional graphics viewer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424825

leigh scott  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #6 from leigh scott  ---
Approved

Please fix the ownership issue on

%doc %{_datadir}/gtk-doc

change it to 

%doc %{_datadir}/gtk-doc/html/%{name}

when you import it


Package Review
==

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


Issues:
===
- 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.
  Note: License file license.page is not marked as %license
  See:
  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text
- glib-compile-schemas is run in %postun and %posttrans if package has
  *.gschema.xml files.
  Note: gschema file(s) in xviewer
  See:
  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#GSettings_Schema


= MUST items =

C/C++:
[-]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[-]: Package contains no static executables.
[-]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
 Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
 attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "GPL", "LGPL (v2 or later)", "GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or
 generated", "GPL (v2 or later) LGPL (v2 or later)", "MIT/X11 (BSD
 like)", "*No copyright* CC by-sa (v3.0)", "CC by-sa (v3.0)", "*No
 copyright* GPL (v2 or later)". 310 files have unknown license.
 Detailed output of licensecheck in
 /home/leigh/Desktop/1424825-xviewer/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[?]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown
 must be documented in the spec.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
 Note: No known owner of /usr/share/help/ar, /usr/share/help/th,
 /usr/share/help/pa
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/help/lv,
 /usr/share/help/fi, /usr/share/help/uk, /usr/share/help/de,
 /usr/share/help/da, /usr/share/help/sv, /usr/share/help/hu,
 /usr/share/help/fr, /usr/share/help/pl, /usr/share/help/C,
 /usr/share/help/ja, /usr/share/help/es, /usr/share/GConf/gsettings,
 /usr/share/help/eu, /usr/share/help/ar, /usr/share/help/ca,
 /usr/share/help/ro, /usr/share/GConf, /usr/share/help/el,
 /usr/share/help/en_GB, /usr/share/help/gl, /usr/share/help/pa,
 /usr/share/help/pt_BR, /usr/share/help/oc, /usr/share/help/it,
 /usr/share/help/sl, /usr/share/help/zh_TW, /usr/share/help/te,
 /usr/share/help/cs, /usr/share/help/ko, /usr/share/help/ru,
 /usr/share/help/th, /usr/share/help/zh_CN
[!]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
 Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/share/gtk-doc(gnome-
 desktop3-devel, libgnome-keyring-devel, libsecret-devel, gcr-devel,
 polkit-docs, p11-kit-devel, libpeas-devel, harfbuzz-devel,
 libcanberra-devel, json-glib-devel, clutter-gst3-devel, libgdata-
 devel, gnome-bluetooth-libs-devel, gtk-doc), /usr/share/gtk-doc/html
 (gnome-desktop3-devel, libgnome-keyring-devel, libsecret-devel, gcr-
 devel, polkit-docs, p11-kit-devel, libpeas-devel, harfbuzz-devel,
 libcanberra-devel, json-glib-devel, clutter-gst3-devel, libgdata-
 devel, gnome-bluetooth-libs-devel, gtk-doc)
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: The spec file handles locales properly.
[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, 

[Bug 1424798] Review Request: xed - X-Apps [Text] Editor (Cross-DE, backward-compatible, GTK3, traditional UI)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424798



--- Comment #7 from Mario Blättermann  ---
Release:0.3%{?dist}

What's the reason to use such a construction for the release number? I can't
found anything in the guidelines [1] which applies to that.

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:DistTag

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1370096] Review Request: rubygem-celluloid-essentials - Internally used tools, and superstructural dependencies of Celluloid

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370096



--- Comment #12 from Germano Massullo  ---
At
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/celluloid-ruby/q-zj1H34e4A/U2b3uCTXDQAJ
Donovan Keme said "We are expecting to refactor to avoid submodules, but not
sure when."

I replied that I will wait for a refactor before trying again to package
celluloid.
I think that for the moment we could close the bugreport as "Won't fix" and
then in future re-open it to proceed with the packaging.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424798] Review Request: xed - X-Apps [Text] Editor (Cross-DE, backward-compatible, GTK3, traditional UI)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424798

leigh scott  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #6 from leigh scott  ---
Approved

Please fix the ownership issue on

%doc %{_datadir}/gtk-doc

change it to 

%doc %{_datadir}/gtk-doc/html/%{name}

when you import it


Package Review
==

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


Issues:
===
- glib-compile-schemas is run in %postun and %posttrans if package has
  *.gschema.xml files.
  Note: gschema file(s) in xed
  See:
  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#GSettings_Schema
- update-desktop-database is invoked in %post and %postun if package
  contains desktop file(s) with a MimeType: entry.
  Note: desktop file(s) with MimeType entry in xed
  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#desktop-
  database


= MUST items =

C/C++:
[-]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[-]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
 Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
 attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "*No copyright* GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF
 address)", "LGPL (v2 or later)", "GPL (v2 or later)", "*No copyright*
 GPL (v2)", "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* GPL (v2 or later)".
 264 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
 /home/leigh/Desktop/1424798-xed/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
 Note: No known owner of /usr/share/help/ar, /usr/share/help/th
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/help/fi,
 /usr/share/help/uk, /usr/share/help/de, /usr/share/help/da,
 /usr/share/help/sv, /usr/share/help/hu, /usr/share/help/fr,
 /usr/share/help/C, /usr/share/help/zh_HK, /usr/share/help/ja,
 /usr/share/help/es, /usr/share/help/cs, /usr/share/help/ar,
 /usr/share/help/ca, /usr/share/help/el, /usr/share/help/zh_CN,
 /usr/share/help/pt_BR, /usr/share/help/oc, /usr/share/help/it,
 /usr/share/help/th, /usr/share/help/zh_TW, /usr/share/help/ko,
 /usr/share/help/bg, /usr/share/help/ru
[!]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
 Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/share/gtk-doc(gnome-
 desktop3-devel, libgnome-keyring-devel, libsecret-devel, gcr-devel,
 polkit-docs, p11-kit-devel, libpeas-devel, harfbuzz-devel,
 libcanberra-devel, json-glib-devel, clutter-gst3-devel, libgdata-
 devel, gnome-bluetooth-libs-devel, gtk-doc), /usr/share/gtk-doc/html
 (gnome-desktop3-devel, libgnome-keyring-devel, libsecret-devel, gcr-
 devel, polkit-docs, p11-kit-devel, libpeas-devel, harfbuzz-devel,
 libcanberra-devel, json-glib-devel, clutter-gst3-devel, libgdata-
 devel, gnome-bluetooth-libs-devel, gtk-doc)
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: The spec file handles locales properly.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[?]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 3 files.
[x]: Package complies to the 

[Bug 1424832] Review Request: xreader - Simple document viewer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424832

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1359390
  Alias||xreader




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359390
[Bug 1359390] Cinnamon X-apps
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424832] Review Request: xreader - Simple document viewer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424832

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||mario.blaetterm...@gmail.co
   ||m



--- Comment #1 from Björn "besser82" Esser  ---
*** Bug 1359110 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1359110] Review Request: xreader - Simple document viewer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359110

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||besse...@fedoraproject.org
 Blocks|1359390 |
 Resolution|NOTABUG |DUPLICATE
  Alias|xreader |



--- Comment #6 from Björn "besser82" Esser  ---


*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1424832 ***


Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359390
[Bug 1359390] Cinnamon X-apps
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424832] New: Review Request: xreader - Simple document viewer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424832

Bug ID: 1424832
   Summary: Review Request: xreader - Simple document viewer
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: besse...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Description:

  X-Apps Document Reader is a document viewer capable of displaying
  multiple and singlepage document formats like PDF and PostScript.


Koji Build:

  https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17957371


Issues:

  No known issues.  Some minor complains from rpmlint.


FAS-User:

  besser82


Urls:

Spec URL:  https://pagure.io/besser82/package-review/raw/master/f/xreader.spec
  SRPM URL: 
https://pagure.io/besser82/package-review/raw/master/f/xreader-1.2.2-0.1.fc26.src.rpm


Thanks for review in advance!

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424798] Review Request: xed - X-Apps [Text] Editor (Cross-DE, backward-compatible, GTK3, traditional UI)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424798



--- Comment #5 from Björn "besser82" Esser  ---
(In reply to leigh scott from comment #4)
> You can remove  these as gnome-common requires them
> 
> BuildRequires:autoconf
> BuildRequires:automake
> BuildRequires:gettext
> 
> The package requires gschema scriptlets
> 
> %{_datadir}/glib-2.0/schemas/org.x.editor.*gschema.xml
> 
> 
> You also have a directory ownership issue on
> 
> %{_datadir}/help
> 
> change it to 
> 
> 
> %{_datadir}/help/*/%{name}/
> 
> 
> Do we really need the debian bits?
> 
> %license AUTHORS COPYING debian/copyright
> %doc ChangeLog README debian/changelog

See:  https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424825#c5

***

Updated package:

Urls:

  Spec URL:  https://pagure.io/besser82/package-review/raw/master/f/xed.spec
  SRPM URL: 
https://pagure.io/besser82/package-review/raw/master/f/xed-1.2.2-0.3.fc26.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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424825] Review Request: xviewer - Fast and functional graphics viewer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424825



--- Comment #5 from Björn "besser82" Esser  ---
(In reply to leigh scott from comment #2)
> You can remove  these as gnome-common requires them
> 
> BuildRequires:autoconf
> BuildRequires:automake
> BuildRequires:gettext

Well, explicit BRs don't hurt.  ;)


> The package requires gschema scriptlets
> 
> %{_datadir}/glib-2.0/schemas/org.x.editor.*gschema.xml

Those are obsolete since F24+.  See: 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Scriptlets#GSettings_Schema


> You also have a directory ownership issue on
> 
> %{_datadir}/help
> 
> change it to 
> 
> %{_datadir}/help/*/%{name}/

Will fix that in short.


> Do we really need the debian bits?
> 
> %license AUTHORS COPYING debian/copyright
> %doc ChangeLog README debian/changelog

I package them, since the debian-changelog is usually more up2date…

***

Updated package:

Urls:

Spec URL:  https://pagure.io/besser82/package-review/raw/master/f/xviewer.spec
  SRPM URL: 
https://pagure.io/besser82/package-review/raw/master/f/xviewer-1.2.2-0.2.fc26.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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424825] Review Request: xviewer - Fast and functional graphics viewer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424825



--- Comment #4 from leigh scott  ---
And

The package requires gschema scriptlets

%{_datadir}/glib-2.0/schemas/*.xml

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424825] Review Request: xviewer - Fast and functional graphics viewer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424825



--- Comment #3 from leigh scott  ---
(In reply to leigh scott from comment #2)

> You also have a directory ownership issue on
> 
> %{_datadir}/help
> 
> change it to 
> 
> 
> %{_datadir}/help/*/%{name}/
> 
> 
> Do we really need the debian bits?
> 
> %license AUTHORS COPYING debian/copyright
> %doc ChangeLog README debian/changelog

I posted this to the wrong review
The above comments also apply to this package, please fix them.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424798] Review Request: xed - X-Apps [Text] Editor (Cross-DE, backward-compatible, GTK3, traditional UI)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424798

leigh scott  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|leigh123li...@googlemail.co
   ||m



--- Comment #4 from leigh scott  ---
You can remove  these as gnome-common requires them

BuildRequires:autoconf
BuildRequires:automake
BuildRequires:gettext

The package requires gschema scriptlets

%{_datadir}/glib-2.0/schemas/org.x.editor.*gschema.xml


You also have a directory ownership issue on

%{_datadir}/help

change it to 


%{_datadir}/help/*/%{name}/


Do we really need the debian bits?

%license AUTHORS COPYING debian/copyright
%doc ChangeLog README debian/changelog

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424825] Review Request: xviewer - Fast and functional graphics viewer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424825

leigh scott  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|leigh123li...@googlemail.co
   ||m



--- Comment #2 from leigh scott  ---
You can remove  these as gnome-common requires them

BuildRequires:autoconf
BuildRequires:automake
BuildRequires:gettext

The package requires gschema scriptlets

%{_datadir}/glib-2.0/schemas/org.x.editor.*gschema.xml


You also have a directory ownership issue on

%{_datadir}/help

change it to 


%{_datadir}/help/*/%{name}/


Do we really need the debian bits?

%license AUTHORS COPYING debian/copyright
%doc ChangeLog README debian/changelog

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424826] Review Request: xviewer-plugins - A collection of plugins for xviewer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424826

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1359390




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359390
[Bug 1359390] Cinnamon X-apps
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424825] Review Request: xviewer - Fast and functional graphics viewer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424825

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks|1359392 |




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359392
[Bug 1359392] Review Request: xviewer-plugins - A collection of plugins for
xviewer
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1359392] Review Request: xviewer-plugins - A collection of plugins for xviewer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359392

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Depends On|1424825 (xviewer)   |




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424825
[Bug 1424825] Review Request: xviewer - Fast and functional graphics viewer
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424825] Review Request: xviewer - Fast and functional graphics viewer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424825

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1424826 (xviewer-plugins)




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424826
[Bug 1424826] Review Request: xviewer-plugins - A collection of plugins for
xviewer
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424826] Review Request: xviewer-plugins - A collection of plugins for xviewer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424826

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||mario.blaetterm...@gmail.co
   ||m



--- Comment #1 from Björn "besser82" Esser  ---
*** Bug 1359392 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1359392] Review Request: xviewer-plugins - A collection of plugins for xviewer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359392

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||besse...@fedoraproject.org
 Blocks|1359390 |
 Resolution|NOTABUG |DUPLICATE
  Alias|xviewer-plugins |



--- Comment #2 from Björn "besser82" Esser  ---


*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1424826 ***


Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359390
[Bug 1359390] Cinnamon X-apps
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424826] Review Request: xviewer-plugins - A collection of plugins for xviewer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424826

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Depends On||1424825 (xviewer)
  Alias||xviewer-plugins




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424825
[Bug 1424825] Review Request: xviewer - Fast and functional graphics viewer
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1354210] Review Request: xviewer - Fast and functional graphics viewer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1354210

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||besse...@fedoraproject.org
 Resolution|NOTABUG |DUPLICATE
  Alias|xviewer |



--- Comment #16 from Björn "besser82" Esser  ---


*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1424825 ***

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1354210] Review Request: xviewer - Fast and functional graphics viewer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1354210

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks|1359390 |




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359390
[Bug 1359390] Cinnamon X-apps
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424826] New: Review Request: xviewer-plugins - A collection of plugins for xviewer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424826

Bug ID: 1424826
   Summary: Review Request: xviewer-plugins - A collection of
plugins for xviewer
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: besse...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Description:

  This package contains plugins for additional features in xviewer.


Koji Build:

  No build.  Missing dependency (xviewer).


Issues:

  No known issues.  Some minor complains from rpmlint.


FAS-User:

  besser82


Urls:

Spec URL: 
https://pagure.io/besser82/package-review/raw/master/f/xviewer-plugins.spec
  SRPM URL: 
https://pagure.io/besser82/package-review/raw/master/f/xviewer-plugins-1.2.0-0.1.fc26.src.rpm


Thanks for review in advance!

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424825] Review Request: xviewer - Fast and functional graphics viewer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424825

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Alias||xviewer



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1359392] Review Request: xviewer-plugins - A collection of plugins for xviewer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359392

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Depends On||1424825




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424825
[Bug 1424825] Review Request: xviewer - Fast and functional graphics viewer
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424825] Review Request: xviewer - Fast and functional graphics viewer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424825

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1359390, 1359392
   ||(xviewer-plugins)
 CC||mario.blaetterm...@gmail.co
   ||m



--- Comment #1 from Björn "besser82" Esser  ---
*** Bug 1354210 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***


Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359390
[Bug 1359390] Cinnamon X-apps
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359392
[Bug 1359392] Review Request: xviewer-plugins - A collection of plugins for
xviewer
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424825] New: Review Request: xviewer - Fast and functional graphics viewer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424825

Bug ID: 1424825
   Summary: Review Request: xviewer - Fast and functional graphics
viewer
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: besse...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Description:

  Xviewer is a simple graphics viewer for the Cinnamon desktop and others
  which uses the gdk-pixbuf library. It can deal with large images, and zoom
  and scroll with constant memory usage. Its goals are simplicity and standards
  compliance.


Koji Build:

  https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17956405


Issues:

  No known issues.  Some minor complains from rpmlint.


FAS-User:

  besser82


Urls:

Spec URL:  https://pagure.io/besser82/package-review/raw/master/f/xviewer.spec
  SRPM URL: 
https://pagure.io/besser82/package-review/raw/master/f/xviewer-1.2.2-0.1.fc26.src.rpm


Thanks for review in advance!

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1422714] Review Request: yank - tool for yanking (copying) stdin to clipboard

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1422714



--- Comment #11 from Nemanja Milosevic  ---
Upstream update (small one) to 0.8.2 (Debian packager also made some changes):

SPEC file: https://pagure.io/yank-rpm/raw/0.8.2/f/yank.spec
SRPM:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/nmilosev/yank/fedora-25-x86_64/00514614-yank/yank-0.8.2-1.fc25.src.rpm
COPR: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/nmilosev/yank/build/514614/

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1411984] Neofetch - a CLI system information tool written in Bash

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1411984



--- Comment #14 from Kees de Jong  ---
(In reply to Nemanja Milosevic from comment #13)
> Informal review (new packager, bare with me):
> 
> I also like this spec file, but I have to agree with Loic, the blank lines
> are making it uglier.
> 
> One other suggestion:
> 
> Currently you have this:
> 
> URL:https://github.com/dylanaraps/%{name}/tree/%{version}
> Source0:   
> https://github.com/dylanaraps/%{name}/archive/%{version}.tar.gz
> 
> I'm unsure if URL should be version independent. If it should be you could
> fix this up a bit like so:
> 
> URL:https://github.com/dylanaraps/%{name}
> Source0:%{url}/archive/%{version}.tar.gz
> 
> Just a suggestion, great work otherwise. :)

Thanks for your review! I will change the URL, the version is indeed not really
relevant.

(In reply to Loic Dachary from comment #12)
> This looks like a fine package to me :-) The only thing that came to mind is
> that there are too many empty lines.

Yes I agree, I kept the blank lines as is from the `rpmdev-newspec` template. I
thought it was some sort of standard layout. I will change this as well!

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1419032] Review Request: mingw-jimtcl - MinGW small embeddable Tcl interpreter

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1419032



--- Comment #5 from Kees de Jong  ---
(In reply to Thomas Sailer from comment #4)
> (In reply to Kees de Jong from comment #3)
> 
> Thank you for your review. I have updated the package accordingly:
> 
> https://sailer.fedorapeople.org/mingw-jimtcl-0.76-2.fc25.src.rpm
> https://sailer.fedorapeople.org/mingw-jimtcl.spec
> 
> http://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/cgit/sailer/mingw/mingw-jimtcl.git/
> diff/?h=f25
> 
> Do you know whether Michael Schwendt is continuing reviewing your package?

I haven't heard from him in a while, I guess he's not planning to. I will email
him directly about this, if he's not willing, will you be able to continue the
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424798] Review Request: xed - X-Apps [Text] Editor (Cross-DE, backward-compatible, GTK3, traditional UI)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424798



--- Comment #3 from Björn "besser82" Esser  ---
Updated package:

Urls:

  Spec URL:  https://pagure.io/besser82/package-review/raw/master/f/xed.spec
  SRPM URL: 
https://pagure.io/besser82/package-review/raw/master/f/xed-1.2.2-0.2.fc26.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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1358699] Review Request: xed - A small and lightweight text editor

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1358699

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|NOTABUG |DUPLICATE



--- Comment #5 from Björn "besser82" Esser  ---


*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1424798 ***

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424798] Review Request: xed - X-Apps [Text] Editor (Cross-DE, backward-compatible, GTK3, traditional UI)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424798

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||mario.blaetterm...@gmail.co
   ||m



--- Comment #2 from Björn "besser82" Esser  ---
*** Bug 1358699 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424798] Review Request: xed - X-Apps [Text] Editor (Cross-DE, backward-compatible, GTK3, traditional UI)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424798

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1359390




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359390
[Bug 1359390] Cinnamon X-apps
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1358699] Review Request: xed - A small and lightweight text editor

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1358699

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks|1359390 |




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359390
[Bug 1359390] Cinnamon X-apps
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424798] Review Request: xed - X-Apps [Text] Editor (Cross-DE, backward-compatible, GTK3, traditional UI)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424798

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Alias||xed



--- Comment #1 from Björn "besser82" Esser  ---
Moved files to pagure-repo:

Urls:

  Spec URL:  https://pagure.io/besser82/package-review/raw/master/f/xed.spec
  SRPM URL: 
https://pagure.io/besser82/package-review/raw/master/f/xed-1.2.2-0.1.fc26.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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1358699] Review Request: xed - A small and lightweight text editor

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1358699

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||besse...@fedoraproject.org
  Alias|xed |



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1378417] Review Request: nodejs-grunt-postcss - Apply several post-processors to your CSS using PostCSS

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1378417

Piotr Popieluch  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks|1378416 |
 Depends On||1378416




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1378416
[Bug 1378416] Review Request: nodejs-postcss - Transforming styles with JS
plugins
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1378416] Review Request: nodejs-postcss - Transforming styles with JS plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1378416

Piotr Popieluch  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||piotr1...@gmail.com
 Blocks||1378417
 Depends On|1378417 |
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|piotr1...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review-



--- Comment #1 from Piotr Popieluch  ---
Hate to say this. 

But I think the packaged files are "compiled/generated", see
https://github.com/postcss/postcss/blob/master/gulpfile.babel.js for the
gulpfile which is used for compilation. There are some missing deps to do the
compilation, one of them is babel which seems to be a big package.

From how I understand the package guidelines all code must be generated from
source unless there is an exception from FPC. See this thread for more info:

https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/nod...@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/YSBHPQXW2FTAVIEF4YUOY27HD5GEUIZB/


Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1378417
[Bug 1378417] Review Request: nodejs-grunt-postcss - Apply several
post-processors to your CSS using PostCSS
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424798] New: Review Request: xed - X-Apps [Text] Editor (Cross-DE, backward-compatible, GTK3, traditional UI)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424798

Bug ID: 1424798
   Summary: Review Request: xed - X-Apps [Text] Editor (Cross-DE,
backward-compatible, GTK3, traditional UI)
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: besse...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Description:

  Xed is a small, but powerful text editor.  It has most standard text
  editor functions and fully supports international text in Unicode.
  Advanced features include syntax highlighting and automatic indentation
  of source code, printing and editing of multiple documents in one window.

  Xed is extensible through a plugin system, which currently includes
  support for spell checking, comparing files, viewing CVS ChangeLogs, and
  adjusting indentation levels.


Koji Build:

  https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17955068


Issues:

  No known issues.  Some minor complains from rpmlint.


FAS-User:

  besser82


Urls:

  Spec URL:  https://besser82.fedorapeople.org/review/xed.spec
  SRPM URL: 
https://besser82.fedorapeople.org/review/xed-1.2.2-0.1.fc26.src.rpm


Thanks for review in advance!

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1378420] Review Request: nodejs-autoprefixer - Parse CSS and add vendor prefixes to rules by Can I Use

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1378420

Piotr Popieluch  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||piotr1...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|piotr1...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review-



--- Comment #1 from Piotr Popieluch  ---
- needs update to latest version

- Does not install 
Error: nothing provides npm(browserslist) >= 1.3.6 needed by
nodejs-autoprefixer-6.4.1-1.fc26.noarch

nodejs-browserlist seems not packaged.

- Must include minimal check:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Node.js?rd=Node.js/Packagers#Build_testing_in_.25check

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1378423] Review Request: nodejs-grunt-contrib-compress - Compress files and folders

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1378423

Piotr Popieluch  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||piotr1...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|piotr1...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review-



--- Comment #1 from Piotr Popieluch  ---
- needs update to latest version

- does not install (needs fixdep on lodash)

- Must at least include minimal test as described here: 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Node.js?rd=Node.js/Packagers#Build_testing_in_.25check
Better is to add the real tests

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1304900] Review Request: nodejs-file-sync-cmp - Synchronous file comparison

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1304900

Piotr Popieluch  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1266169




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1266169
[Bug 1266169] missing needed dependency npm(file-sync-cmp)
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1370451] Review Request: nodejs-grunt-contrib-copy - Copy files and folders

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370451

Piotr Popieluch  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||piotr1...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|piotr1...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #1 from Piotr Popieluch  ---
I've updated the specfile. See changelog for details. Approved if you are ok
with my changes. You can add me as co-maintainer.

Spec URL: https://piotrp.fedorapeople.org/nodejs-grunt-contrib-copy.spec
SRPM URL:
https://piotrp.fedorapeople.org/nodejs-grunt-contrib-copy-1.0.0-2.fc26.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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424788] Review Request: nodejs-safe-buffer - Node.js module for a safer buffer API

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424788

Parag AN(पराग)  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||panem...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग)  ---
Package Review
==

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



= 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.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "Unknown or generated". 6 files have
 unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
 /home/parag/1424788-nodejs-safe-buffer/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 30720 bytes in 1 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]: Package installs properly.
[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 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

= 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).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
 translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
 files.
[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]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in 

[Bug 1424788] Review Request: nodejs-safe-buffer - Node.js module for a safer buffer API

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424788



--- Comment #2 from Parag AN(पराग)  ---
Thank you Piotr for packaging this module and helping for nodejs-got package.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424788] Review Request: nodejs-safe-buffer - Node.js module for a safer buffer API

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424788

Piotr Popieluch  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||956806 (nodejs-reviews)




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956806
[Bug 956806] Node.js Review Tracker
-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424788] New: Review Request: nodejs-safe-buffer - Node.js module for a safer buffer API

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424788

Bug ID: 1424788
   Summary: Review Request: nodejs-safe-buffer - Node.js module
for a safer buffer API
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: piotr1...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: https://piotrp.fedorapeople.org/nodejs-safe-buffer.spec
SRPM URL:
https://piotrp.fedorapeople.org/nodejs-safe-buffer-5.0.1-1.fc26.src.rpm
Description: Node.js module for a safer buffer API
Fedora Account System Username: piotrp

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1423772] Review Request: jchart2d - Real-time charting library for Java

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1423772



--- Comment #5 from MartinKG  ---
@Gil, Thanks for your professional help.
comment improved.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1234664] Review Request: jchart2d - Real-time charting library for Java

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234664

gil cattaneo  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks|652183 (FE-JAVASIG) |




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652183
[Bug 652183] Java SIG tracker bug
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1082660] Review Request: mahout-collections - Primitive-type collections based on CERN' s Colt Java API

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1082660

gil cattaneo  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks|652183 (FE-JAVASIG) |




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652183
[Bug 652183] Java SIG tracker bug
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1018489] Review Request: griffon - A Grails-like Rich Application Platform

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018489

gil cattaneo  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks|652183 (FE-JAVASIG) |




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652183
[Bug 652183] Java SIG tracker bug
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424772] Review Request: bluez-tools - A set of tools to manage Bluetooth devices for Linux

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424772

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|Review Request: bluez-tools |Review Request: bluez-tools
   |- A set of tools to manage  |- A set of tools to manage
   |bluetooth devices for linux |Bluetooth devices for Linux



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424772] Review Request: bluez-tools - A set of tools to manage bluetooth devices for linux

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424772

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST



--- Comment #2 from Björn "besser82" Esser  ---
(In reply to leigh scott from comment #1)
> Approved please remove NEWS when you import
> 
> bluez-tools.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/bluez-tools/NEWS


Will do so!  Thank you very much for the quick 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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424772] Review Request: bluez-tools - A set of tools to manage bluetooth devices for linux

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424772

leigh scott  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #1 from leigh scott  ---
Approved please remove NEWS when you import

bluez-tools.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/bluez-tools/NEWS



Package Review
==

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



= MUST items =

C/C++:
[-]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[-]: 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.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "FSF All Permissive", "GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or
 generated". 55 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
 licensecheck in /home/leigh/Desktop/1424772-bluez-
 tools/licensecheck.txt
[-]: 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
[-]: 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.
[?]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 3 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]: Package installs properly.
[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 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

= 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).
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
 Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in bluez-
 tools-debuginfo
[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 

[Bug 1424772] Review Request: bluez-tools - A set of tools to manage bluetooth devices for linux

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424772

leigh scott  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||leigh123li...@googlemail.co
   ||m
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|leigh123li...@googlemail.co
   ||m



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424772] Review Request: bluez-tools - A set of tools to manage bluetooth devices for linux

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424772

Björn "besser82" Esser  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Alias||bluez-tools



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1424772] New: Review Request: bluez-tools - A set of tools to manage bluetooth devices for linux

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424772

Bug ID: 1424772
   Summary: Review Request: bluez-tools - A set of tools to manage
bluetooth devices for linux
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: besse...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Description:

  This was a GSoC'10 project to implement a new command line tools for
  bluez (bluetooth stack for linux).  It is currently an active open
  source project.

  The project is implemented in C and uses the D-Bus interface of bluez.

  The project is still a work in progress, and not all APIs from Bluez
  have been implemented as a part of bluez-tools.  The APIs which have
  been implemented in bluez-tools are adapter, agent, device, network
  and obex.  Other APIs, such as interfaces for medical devices,
  pedometers and other specific APIs have not been ported to bluez-tools.


Koji Build:

  https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17951715


Issues:

  No known issues.  Some minor complains from rpmlint.


FAS-User:

  besser82


Urls:

  Spec URL:  https://besser82.fedorapeople.org/review/bluez-tools.spec
  SRPM URL: 
https://besser82.fedorapeople.org/review/bluez-tools-0.2.0-0.1.fc26.src.rpm


Thanks for review in advance!

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1423772] Review Request: jchart2d - Real-time charting library for Java

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1423772

gil cattaneo  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks|652183 (FE-JAVASIG) |




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652183
[Bug 652183] Java SIG tracker bug
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1423772] Review Request: jchart2d - Real-time charting library for Java

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1423772

gil cattaneo  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

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



--- Comment #4 from gil cattaneo  ---
Package Review
==

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



= 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.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "LGPL (v2.1 or later)", "LGPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF
 address)", "Unknown or generated". 3 files have unknown license.
 Detailed output of licensecheck in
 /home/gil/1423772-jchart2d/licensecheck.txt
[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.
[-]: 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.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 61440 bytes in 1 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]: Package installs properly.
[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 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

Java:
[x]: Bundled jar/class files should be removed before build
[x]: Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
 Note: Maven packages do not need to (Build)Require jpackage-utils. It
 is pulled in by maven-local
[x]: Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
 subpackage
[x]: Javadoc subpackages should not have Requires: jpackage-utils
[x]: Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlink)

Maven:
[x]: If package contains pom.xml files install it (including metadata) even
 when building with ant
[x]: POM files have correct Maven mapping
[x]: Maven packages should use new style packaging
[x]: Old add_to_maven_depmap macro is not being used
[x]: Packages DO NOT have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on jpackage-
 utils for %update_maven_depmap macro
[x]: Package DOES NOT use %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[x]: Packages use .mfiles file list instead of %{_datadir}/maven2/poms

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[-]: If the source 

[Bug 1423772] Review Request: jchart2d - Real-time charting library for Java

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1423772



--- Comment #3 from MartinKG  ---
Spec URL: https://martinkg.fedorapeople.org/Review/SPECS/jchart2d.spec
SRPM URL:
https://martinkg.fedorapeople.org/Review/SRPMS/jchart2d-3.3.2-1.fc25.src.rpm

%changelog
* Sun Feb 19 2017 Martin Gansser  - 3.3.2-1
- initial rpm


rpmlint -i jchart2d.spec
/home/martin/rpmbuild/SRPMS/jchart2d-3.3.2-1.fc25.src.rpm
/home/martin/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/jchart2d-3.3.2-1.fc25.noarch.rpm
/home/martin/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/jchart2d-javadoc-3.3.2-1.fc25.noarch.rpm
jchart2d.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: jchart2d-3.3.2-f1b6e99.tar.bz2
The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL.

jchart2d.src: W: invalid-url Source0: jchart2d-3.3.2-f1b6e99.tar.bz2
The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL.

3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1279201] Review Request: flume - A distributed log collection application for collecting data

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1279201
Bug 1279201 depends on bug 1244657, which changed state.

Bug 1244657 Summary: Review Request: asynchbase - An alternative HBase client 
library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1244657

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1244657] Review Request: asynchbase - An alternative HBase client library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1244657

gil cattaneo  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2017-02-19 05:43:08



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1244657] Review Request: asynchbase - An alternative HBase client library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1244657

gil cattaneo  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version||asynchbase-1.7.2-1.fc26



--- Comment #12 from gil cattaneo  ---
Task info: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17950725

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1370096] Review Request: rubygem-celluloid-essentials - Internally used tools, and superstructural dependencies of Celluloid

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370096



--- Comment #11 from Germano Massullo  ---
I have just wrote to celluloid developers. I am waiting for a reply

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org