[Bug 1476085] Review Request: libsemigroups - C++ library for semigroups and monoids

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1476085



--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System  ---
libsemigroups-0.3.1-3.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-0898127c09

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1476085] Review Request: libsemigroups - C++ library for semigroups and monoids

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1476085

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



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

[Bug 1476595] Review Request: dtkcore - Deepin tool kit core modules

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1476595

Ye Cheng <18969068...@163.com> changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||18969068...@163.com



--- Comment #1 from Ye Cheng <18969068...@163.com> ---
> %doc src/Specification.md
This seems like a typo. 
It should be %doc doc/Specification.md

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

[Bug 1431748] Review Request: golang-github-cznic-ql - Embedded SQL database written in Go

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1431748



--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System  ---
golang-github-cznic-ql-1.1.0-1.20170522.gitba9eea9.fc26 has been pushed to the
Fedora 26 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it
in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-5d0f679b95

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1476790] Review Request: python-stestr - A test runner runner similar to testrepository

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1476790

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-stestr-0.5.0-3.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 testing repository.
If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-0c9fb7977a

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1434744] Review Request: uom-lib - Java Units of Measurement Libraries (JSR 363)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434744

Lukas Berk  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



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

[Bug 1434744] Review Request: uom-lib - Java Units of Measurement Libraries (JSR 363)

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434744



--- Comment #1 from Lukas Berk  ---
Updated SRPM URL:
https://bintray.com/pcp/f26/download_file?file_path=uom-lib-1.0.1-5.fc26.src.rpm
Updated Spec file: uom-lib.spec

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: "BSD (3 clause)", "Unknown or generated". 5 files have unknown
 license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/lberk/src/fedora-
 scm/review/review-uom-lib/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.
[X]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[X]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[X]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[X]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[X]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[X]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[X]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[X]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[X]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[X]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[X]: 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 10240 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: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
 license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
 license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
 that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
 provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
 %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

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:
[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 

[Bug 1431748] Review Request: golang-github-cznic-ql - Embedded SQL database written in Go

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1431748

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System  ---
golang-github-cznic-ql-1.1.0-1.20170522.gitba9eea9.fc25 has been pushed to the
Fedora 25 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it
in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-1cde795c7a

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1477363] New: Review Request: ocaml-cmdliner - Declarative definition of command line interfaces for OCaml

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1477363

Bug ID: 1477363
   Summary: Review Request: ocaml-cmdliner - Declarative
definition of command line interfaces for OCaml
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: rosser@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: https://tc01.fedorapeople.org/ocaml/opam/ocaml-cmdliner.spec
SRPM URL:
https://tc01.fedorapeople.org/ocaml/opam/ocaml-cmdliner-1.0.0-1.20170801git8c4bc23.fc26.src.rpm

Description:

Cmdliner allows the declarative definition of command line
interfaces for OCaml.

It provides a simple and compositional mechanism to convert
command line arguments to OCaml values and pass them to your
functions. The module automatically handles syntax errors,
help messages and UNIX man page generation. It supports
programs with single or multiple commands and respects
most of the POSIX and GNU conventions.

Cmdliner has no dependencies and is distributed under
the ISC license.

Fedora Account System Username: tc01

This is one of a handful of dependencies for opam, the OCaml package manager.

There is an option in the makefile to build a "dynlink" native lib
(https://caml.inria.fr/pub/docs/manual-ocaml/libref/Dynlink.html, I assume).
I'm not sure if our guidelines want us to package these, so I have avoided
doing so. It would be easy enough to enable.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1477362] New: Review Request: ocaml-opam-file-format - Parser and printer for the opam file syntax

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1477362

Bug ID: 1477362
   Summary: Review Request: ocaml-opam-file-format - Parser and
printer for the opam file syntax
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: rosser@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: https://tc01.fedorapeople.org/ocaml/opam/ocaml-opam-file-format.spec
SRPM URL:
https://tc01.fedorapeople.org/ocaml/opam/ocaml-opam-file-format-2.0.0-0.1.beta3.fc26.src.rpm
Description: Parser and printer for the opam file syntax
Fedora Account System Username: tc01

This is one of a handful of dependencies for opam, the OCaml package manager.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1477134] Review Request: authselect - Configures authentication and identity sources from supported profiles

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1477134



--- Comment #5 from Fabiano Fidêncio  ---
Jakub, please, make an SCM admin request[0] for this package.

You have an ACK from me and the fedora-review flag has been set to "+".

[0]: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageDB_admin_requests

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

[Bug 1477134] Review Request: authselect - Configures authentication and identity sources from supported profiles

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1477134

Fabiano Fidêncio  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags||fedora-review+



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

[Bug 1477134] Review Request: authselect - Configures authentication and identity sources from supported profiles

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1477134



--- Comment #4 from Fabiano Fidêncio  ---
Package Review
==

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



= MUST items =

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4
[x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 40960 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 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:
[x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
 file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
 translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
 architectures.
[ ]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
 files.
[x]: 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 

[Bug 1477134] Review Request: authselect - Configures authentication and identity sources from supported profiles

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1477134



--- Comment #3 from Jakub Hrozek  ---
Thank you very much for the swift review. New srpm and specfile are uploaded
at:

Spec URL: https://jhrozek.fedorapeople.org/authselect/authselect.spec

SRPM URL:
https://jhrozek.fedorapeople.org/authselect/authselect-0.1.alpha-2.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 1471806] Review Request: danmaQ - A small client side Qt program to play danmaku on any screen

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1471806

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?(zebo...@gmail.com |
   |)   |



--- Comment #9 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
Sorry, I am having computer issues on the Windows side of things. 

The package is all good to me, you just need official approval now.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1477262] Review Request: libtgvoip - VoIP library for Telegram clients

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1477262

Vitaly Zaitsev  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Last Closed||2017-08-01 13:22:04



--- Comment #1 from Vitaly Zaitsev  ---
This library cannot be shipped with Fedora due patents protected
echo-cancellation library.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1432993] Review Request: hd-idle - Spin down idle [USB] hard disks

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1432993

Randy Barlow  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags||needinfo?(samuel.rakitnican
   ||@gmail.com)



--- Comment #5 from Randy Barlow  ---
fedora-review is unable to retrieve the spec file URL:

$ fedora-review -b 1432993
INFO: Processing bugzilla bug: 1432993
INFO: Getting .spec and .srpm Urls from : 1432993
INFO:   --> SRPM url:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/srakitnican/default/fedora-25-x86_64/00519190-hd-idle/hd-idle-1.05-1.fc25.src.rpm
ERROR: 'Cannot find spec file URL'

Perhaps google drive isn't a suitable host for the spec file? I'm not sure, but
I know that you can use your fedorapeople hosting space to host spec files
successfully.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1461368] Review Request: mingw-pcre2 - MinGW Windows pcre2 library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1461368

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2017-08-01 12:22:43



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
mingw-pcre2-10.23-2.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 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 1477262] New: Review Request: libtgvoip - VoIP library for Telegram clients

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1477262

Bug ID: 1477262
   Summary: Review Request: libtgvoip - VoIP library for Telegram
clients
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: vit...@easycoding.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: https://github.com/xvitaly/tgbuild/raw/master/libtgvoip.spec
SRPM URL:
http://koji.russianfedora.pro/kojifiles/work/tasks/4629/54629/libtgvoip-1.0-1.20170727git01f2701.fc27.src.rpm
Description: Provides VoIP library for Telegram clients
Fedora Account System Username: xvitaly

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1471806] Review Request: danmaQ - A small client side Qt program to play danmaku on any screen

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1471806

Zamir SUN  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags||needinfo?(zebo...@gmail.com
   ||)



--- Comment #8 from Zamir SUN  ---
Anything else that I need to fix before getting approved?

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

[Bug 1002275] Review Request: ima-evm-utils - IMA/EVM Utilities

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1002275

Hanns-Joachim Uhl  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1384450



-- 
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 807476] Review Request:ima-evm-utils -IMA/EVM support utilities

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=807476

Hanns-Joachim Uhl  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1384450



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1475715] Review Request: python-yattag - Pure python alternative to web template engines

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1475715

Nikola Forró  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #3 from Nikola Forró  ---
Package Review
==

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



= 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.
[-]: 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.
[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

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.
 Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
 python2-yattag , python3-yattag
[x]: 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]: 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]: 

[Bug 1466961] Review Request: datamash - A statistical, numerical and textual operations tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1466961



--- Comment #12 from Dave Love  ---
(In reply to Hannes Frederic Sowa from comment #11)
> Ping. Dave, do you have any other comments?

Not more that it builds on el6 (the koji el6-candidate target, though I used
mock). I'm not the reviewer, though.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1475715] Review Request: python-yattag - Pure python alternative to web template engines

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1475715

Sebastian Kisela  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?(skis...@redhat.co |
   |m)  |



--- Comment #2 from Sebastian Kisela  ---
(In reply to Nikola Forró from comment #1)
> Issues
> ==
> - LGPLv2.1 is not valid license short name, should be LGPLv2
> - python{2,3}-pytest is not necessary
> 

Thanks for review!

Please see updated specfile + SRPM.

Spec URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/skisela/python-yattag/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00585430-python-yattag/python-yattag.spec
SRPM URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/skisela/python-yattag/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00585430-python-yattag/python-yattag-1.8.0-1.fc27.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 1477134] Review Request: authselect - Configures authentication and identity sources from supported profiles

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1477134



--- Comment #2 from Fabiano Fidêncio  ---
Jakub, please, take a look in the review done in comment 3.

Basically, seems that:
- `%postun libs -p /sbin/ldconfig` is missing in the specfile;
- a few rpmlist errors described above will have to be fixed;

Apart from that, everything else looks fine.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1477134] Review Request: authselect - Configures authentication and identity sources from supported profiles

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1477134



--- Comment #1 from Fabiano Fidêncio  ---
Package Review
==

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


Issues:
===
- ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
  Note: /sbin/ldconfig not called in authselect-libs
  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Shared_Libraries

= MUST items =

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[ ]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.

[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4
 NOTE: %defattr present but not needed

[ ]: 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.
[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.
[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 does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
 that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
 provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
 %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[ ]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
 file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
 Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
 authselect-libs , authselect-debuginfo
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[ ]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[ ]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
 translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
 architectures.
[ ]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[ ]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
 files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in 

[Bug 1465130] Review Request: nuvola-app-8tracks - 8tracks for Nuvola Player 3

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1465130



--- Comment #2 from mgans...@alice.de  ---
correct links for the rpm packages:

Spec URL:
https://martinkg.fedorapeople.org/Review/SPECS/nuvola-app-8tracks.spec
SRPM URL:
https://martinkg.fedorapeople.org/Review/SRPMS/nuvola-app-8tracks-5.2-1.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 1475715] Review Request: python-yattag - Pure python alternative to web template engines

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1475715

Nikola Forró  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||skis...@redhat.com
  Flags||needinfo?(skis...@redhat.co
   ||m)



--- Comment #1 from Nikola Forró  ---
Issues
==
- LGPLv2.1 is not valid license short name, should be LGPLv2
- python{2,3}-pytest is not necessary



Package Review
==

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



= MUST items =

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[?]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: 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.
[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

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.
 Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
 python2-yattag , python3-yattag
[x]: 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]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
 architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: 

[Bug 1470705] Review Request: perl-Log-ger - Lightweight, flexible logging framework

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1470705
Bug 1470705 depends on bug 1470678, which changed state.

Bug 1470678 Summary: Review Request: perl-Data-Dmp - Dump Perl data structures 
as Perl code
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1470678

   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 1470678] Review Request: perl-Data-Dmp - Dump Perl data structures as Perl code

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1470678

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
   Fixed In Version||perl-Data-Dmp-0.23-1.fc27
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2017-08-01 09:04:52



--- Comment #3 from Jitka Plesnikova  ---
Thank you for the review and the repository.

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

[Bug 1476237] Review Request: perl-Graphics-TIFF - Perl extension for the LibTIFF library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1476237

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
   Fixed In Version||perl-Graphics-TIFF-4-1.fc27
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2017-08-01 08:58:54



--- Comment #3 from Petr Pisar  ---
Thank you for the review and the repository. I will upgrade the package later.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1474403] Review Request: perl-Env-ShellWords - Environment variables for arguments as a Perl array

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1474403

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
   Fixed In Version||perl-Env-ShellWords-0.01-1.
   ||fc27
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2017-08-01 08:56:11



--- Comment #3 from Petr Pisar  ---
Thank you for the review and the repository.

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

[Bug 1474425] Review Request: perl-Alien-Build - Build external dependencies for use in CPAN

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1474425
Bug 1474425 depends on bug 1474403, which changed state.

Bug 1474403 Summary: Review Request: perl-Env-ShellWords - Environment 
variables for arguments as a Perl array
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1474403

   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 1474392] Review Request: perl-Test-Exec - Test that some code calls exec without terminating testing

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1474392

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
   Fixed In Version||perl-Test-Exec-0.04-1.fc27
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2017-08-01 08:54:30



--- Comment #3 from Petr Pisar  ---
Thank you for the review and the repository. I added the dependency on make.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1474425] Review Request: perl-Alien-Build - Build external dependencies for use in CPAN

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1474425
Bug 1474425 depends on bug 1474392, which changed state.

Bug 1474392 Summary: Review Request: perl-Test-Exec - Test that some code calls 
exec without terminating testing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1474392

   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 1477197] New: Review Request: perl-Email-Address-XS - Parse and format RFC 2822 email addresses and groups

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1477197

Bug ID: 1477197
   Summary: Review Request: perl-Email-Address-XS - Parse and
format RFC 2822 email addresses and groups
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: jples...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL:
https://jplesnik.fedorapeople.org/perl-Email-Address-XS/perl-Email-Address-XS.spec
SRPM URL:
https://jplesnik.fedorapeople.org/perl-Email-Address-XS/perl-Email-Address-XS-1.00-1.fc27.src.rpm

Description:
This module implements RFC 2822 parser and formatter of email addresses and
groups. It parses an input string from email headers which contain a list
of email addresses or a groups of email addresses (like From, To, Cc, Bcc,
Reply-To, Sender, ...). Also it can generate a string value for those
headers from a list of email addresses objects.

Fedora Account System Username: jples...@redhat.com

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

[Bug 1474425] Review Request: perl-Alien-Build - Build external dependencies for use in CPAN

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1474425
Bug 1474425 depends on bug 1474333, which changed state.

Bug 1474333 Summary: Review Request: perl-Config-INI-Reader-Multiline - Parser 
for INI files with line continuations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1474333

   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 1474333] Review Request: perl-Config-INI-Reader-Multiline - Parser for INI files with line continuations

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1474333

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
   Fixed In Version||perl-Config-INI-Reader-Mult
   ||iline-1.001-1.fc27
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2017-08-01 08:47:36



--- Comment #3 from Petr Pisar  ---
Thank you for the review and the repository.

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

[Bug 1473705] Review Request: perl-Alien-Base-ModuleBuild - Perl framework for building Alien:: modules and their libraries

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1473705
Bug 1473705 depends on bug 1473663, which changed state.

Bug 1473663 Summary: Review Request: perl-Shell-Guess - Make an educated guess 
about the shell in use
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1473663

   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 1473678] Review Request: perl-Shell-Config-Generate - Portably generate configuration for any shell

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1473678
Bug 1473678 depends on bug 1473663, which changed state.

Bug 1473663 Summary: Review Request: perl-Shell-Guess - Make an educated guess 
about the shell in use
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1473663

   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 1473663] Review Request: perl-Shell-Guess - Make an educated guess about the shell in use

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1473663

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2017-08-01 08:43:27



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1473663] Review Request: perl-Shell-Guess - Make an educated guess about the shell in use

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1473663

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version||perl-Shell-Guess-0.06-1.fc2
   ||7



--- Comment #3 from Petr Pisar  ---
Thank you for the review and the repository.

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

[Bug 1477137] Review Request: tetrominos - Simple CLI logical game

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1477137

jiri vanek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Docs Contact|jva...@redhat.com   |
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jva...@redhat.com



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

[Bug 1476237] Review Request: perl-Graphics-TIFF - Perl extension for the LibTIFF library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1476237



--- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/perl-Graphics-TIFF

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1474403] Review Request: perl-Env-ShellWords - Environment variables for arguments as a Perl array

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1474403



--- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/perl-Env-ShellWords

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1120788] Review Request: Rex - Tool for Automation, Remote Execution and Configuration Deployment

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1120788



--- Comment #20 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/Rex

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1470678] Review Request: perl-Data-Dmp - Dump Perl data structures as Perl code

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1470678



--- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/perl-Data-Dmp

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1474392] Review Request: perl-Test-Exec - Test that some code calls exec without terminating testing

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1474392



--- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/perl-Test-Exec

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1474333] Review Request: perl-Config-INI-Reader-Multiline - Parser for INI files with line continuations

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1474333



--- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/perl-Config-INI-Reader-Multiline

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1473663] Review Request: perl-Shell-Guess - Make an educated guess about the shell in use

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1473663



--- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/perl-Shell-Guess

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1476085] Review Request: libsemigroups - C++ library for semigroups and monoids

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1476085



--- Comment #15 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/libsemigroups

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1475483] Review Request: qbs - Cross platform build tool

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1475483



--- Comment #10 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/qbs

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1477137] Review Request: tetrominos - Simple CLI logical game

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1477137

jiri vanek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #3 from jiri vanek  ---
Package is approved

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

[Bug 1477137] Review Request: tetrominos - Simple CLI logical game

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1477137

jiri vanek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #2 from jiri vanek  ---
Pelase truncate line cs description. I think "Postavte tetromino bloky tak, aby
zaplnily celé řádky." Is perfectly enough.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1477137] Review Request: tetrominos - Simple CLI logical game

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1477137

jiri vanek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED



--- Comment #1 from jiri vanek  ---
Package Review
==

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



= MUST items =

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "Unknown or generated". 16 files have
 unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
 /home/jvanek/1477137-tetrominos/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: 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 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:
[-]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro.
[-]: 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
 tetrominos-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 package spec file contains
 translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into 

[Bug 1409866] Review Request: perl-Astro-SunTime - Calculates sun rise/ set times

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1409866

Paul Howarth  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||p...@city-fan.org



--- Comment #25 from Paul Howarth  ---
(In reply to Andrew Bauer from comment #6)
> (In reply to Petr Pisar from comment #2)
> > FIX: Change the Group tag value to one enumerated in
> > /usr/share/doc/rpm/GROUPS (`Development/Libraries' probably) or remove the
> > tag because it's deprecated in Fedora.
> 
> Since my goal is to get this package in EPEL 6 & 7, in addition to Fedora, I
> set the Group to Development/Libraries, rather than remove it.

Just as a point of interest, the last EL release that required spec files to
have Group: tags was EL-5; it's not actually needed for EL-6 onwards.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1476237] Review Request: perl-Graphics-TIFF - Perl extension for the LibTIFF library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1476237

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #1 from Jitka Plesnikova  ---
Source file is ok
Summary is ok
License is ok
Description is ok
URL and Source0 are ok
All tests passed
BuildRequires are ok

$ rpm -qp --requires perl-Graphics-TIFF-4-1.fc27.x86_64.rpm | sort | uniq -c
  1 libc.so.6()(64bit)
  1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit)
  1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit)
  1 libperl.so.5.26()(64bit)
  1 libtiff.so.5()(64bit)
  1 libtiff.so.5(LIBTIFF_4.0)(64bit)
  1 perl(base)
  1 perl(Exporter)
  1 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.26.0)
  1 perl(Readonly)
  1 perl(strict)
  1 perl(:VERSION) >= 5.8.5
  1 perl(warnings)
  1 perl(XSLoader)
  1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
  1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1
  1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
  1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1
  1 rtld(GNU_HASH)
Binary requires are Ok.

$ rpm -qp --provides perl-Graphics-TIFF-4-1.fc27.x86_64.rpm | sort | uniq -c
  1 perl(Graphics::TIFF) = 4
  1 perl-Graphics-TIFF = 4-1.fc27
  1 perl-Graphics-TIFF(x86-64) = 4-1.fc27
Binary provides are Ok.

$ rpmlint ./perl-Graphics-TIFF*
perl-Graphics-TIFF.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/.build-id
perl-Graphics-TIFF.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/.build-id
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
Rpmlint is ok

FIX: The new version '5' appears, please update the package.

Otherwise the package looks good.
Approved

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

[Bug 1477154] Re-Review Request: meta-test-family - a tool to test components of a modular Fedora

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1477154

Irina Gulina  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||igul...@redhat.com
Summary|Re-Review Request:  |Re-Review Request:
   |meta-test-family -  |meta-test-family - a tool
   |Framework for writing tests |to test components of a
   |for modules and containers  |modular Fedora



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1477134] Review Request: authselect - Configures authentication and identity sources from supported profiles

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1477134

Fabiano Fidêncio  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|fiden...@redhat.com



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

[Bug 1477154] Re-Review Request: meta-test-family - Framework for writing tests for modules and containers

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1477154



--- Comment #1 from Petr Hracek  ---
I forgot to update Obsoletes and Provides.

Spec URL: https://phracek.fedorapeople.org/meta-test-family.spec
SRPM URL:
https://phracek.fedorapeople.org/meta-test-family-0.5.18-2.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 1477154] New: Re-Review Request: meta-test-family - Framework for writing tests for modules and containers

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1477154

Bug ID: 1477154
   Summary: Re-Review Request: meta-test-family - Framework for
writing tests for modules and containers
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: phra...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: https://phracek.fedorapeople.org/meta-test-family.spec
SRPM URL:
https://phracek.fedorapeople.org/meta-test-family-0.5.18-1.fc25.src.rpm
Description: Framework for writing tests for modules and containers
Fedora Account System Username: phracek

This is re-review request for older package name called
modularity-testing-framework.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/modularity-testing-framework/
New package name will be meta-test-family

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1477137] Review Request: tetrominos - Simple CLI logical game

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1477137

jiri vanek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||jva...@redhat.com
   Docs Contact||jva...@redhat.com



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

[Bug 1336168] Review Request: git-lfs - Git extension for versioning large files

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1336168

cl...@redhat.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

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



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

[Bug 1427634] Review Request: syncthing - Continuous File Synchronization

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1427634



--- Comment #18 from Fabio Valentini  ---
I've adapted the patch to the upstream build script so all fedora-specific
build flags and LDFLAGS are passed correctly, which fixes the previously broken
-debuginfo and -debugsources subpackages.

Additionally, since all dependencies are in the rawhide buildroot now
(repository/mirrors may take some time yet), I can provide a successful koji
scratch build (ppc64 fails for obvious reasons):
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=20941996


Spec URL: https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/packages/syncthing.spec

SRPM URL:
https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/packages/syncthing-0.14.33-2.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 1476237] Review Request: perl-Graphics-TIFF - Perl extension for the LibTIFF library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1476237

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||jples...@redhat.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jples...@redhat.com
  Flags||fedora-review?



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

[Bug 1421183] Review Request: ntetris - simple cli tetris game

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1421183

Michal Vala  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Last Closed||2017-08-01 06:16:34



--- Comment #18 from Michal Vala  ---
closing. review with renamed package here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1477137

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1477137] New: Review Request: tetrominos - Simple CLI logical game

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1477137

Bug ID: 1477137
   Summary: Review Request: tetrominos - Simple CLI logical game
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: mv...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL:
https://github.com/sparkoo/NTetris/releases/download/1.0.1/tetrominos.spec
SRPM URL:
https://github.com/sparkoo/NTetris/releases/download/1.0.1/tetrominos-1.0.1-1.fc26.src.rpm
Description: Simple CLI logical game. Build tetromino blocks to fill full
lines. Based on Ncurses lib for CLI gaming.
Fedora Account System Username: michalvala
Koji build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=20941950
Note: rename of https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1421183

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1477134] New: Review Request: authselect - Configures authentication and identity sources from supported profiles

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1477134

Bug ID: 1477134
   Summary: Review Request: authselect - Configures authentication
and identity sources from supported profiles
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Priority: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: jhro...@redhat.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: https://jhrozek.fedorapeople.org/authselect/authselect.spec

SRPM URL:
https://jhrozek.fedorapeople.org/authselect/authselect-0.1.alpha-1.fc25.src.rpm

Description: Authconfig is designed to be a replacement for authconfig but it
takes a different
approach to configure the system. Instead of letting the administrator
build the pam stack with a tool (which may potentially end up with a
broken configuration), it would ship several tested stacks (profiles)
that solve a use-case and are well tested and supported. At the same time,
some obsolete features of authconfig are not supported by authselect.

Fedora Account System Username: jhrozek

scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=20941931

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1120788] Review Request: Rex - Tool for Automation, Remote Execution and Configuration Deployment

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1120788



--- Comment #19 from Dominic Hopf  ---
Thanks very much for taking care of this Review Robin. :-)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1431748] Review Request: golang-github-cznic-ql - Embedded SQL database written in Go

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1431748



--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System  ---
golang-github-cznic-ql-1.1.0-1.20170522.gitba9eea9.fc26 has been submitted as
an update to Fedora 26.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-5d0f679b95

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1431748] Review Request: golang-github-cznic-ql - Embedded SQL database written in Go

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1431748

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



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

[Bug 1474403] Review Request: perl-Env-ShellWords - Environment variables for arguments as a Perl array

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1474403

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #1 from Jitka Plesnikova  ---
Source file is ok
Summary is ok
License is ok
Description is ok
URL and Source0 are ok
All tests passed
BuildRequires are ok

$ rpm -qp --requires perl-Env-ShellWords-0.01-1.fc27.noarch.rpm | sort | uniq
-c
  1 perl(Carp)
  1 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.26.0)
  1 perl(strict)
  1 perl(Text::ParseWords)
  1 perl(warnings)
  1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
  1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1
  1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
  1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1
Binary requires are Ok.

$ rpm -qp --provides perl-Env-ShellWords-0.01-1.fc27.noarch.rpm | sort | uniq
-c
  1 perl(Env::ShellWords) = 0.01
  1 perl-Env-ShellWords = 0.01-1.fc27
Binary provides are Ok.

$ rpmlint ./perl-Env-ShellWords*
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
Rpmlint is ok

The package looks good.
Approved

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

[Bug 1476773] Review Request: python-subunit2sql - Command to Read a subunit file or stream and put the data in a SQL DB

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1476773



--- Comment #3 from Matthias Runge  ---
Package Review
==

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


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


= 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: "Apache (v2.0)", "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* Apache
 (v2.0)". 56 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
 licensecheck in /home/mrunge/review/1476773-python-
 subunit2sql/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.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 10240 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]: 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).
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
 Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
 python2-subunit2sql , python2-subunit2sql-graph , python-subunit2sql-
 doc
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
 translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
 architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: 

[Bug 1476434] Review Request: Bstrlib - Better String Library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1476434



--- Comment #6 from Ye Cheng <18969068...@163.com> ---
(In reply to Ye Cheng from comment #0)
Sorry, yet another build to make it honour %__global_ldflags
 Spec URL: 
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/yecheng/bstrlib/fedora-rawhide-i386/00585367-bstrlib/bstrlib.spec
 SRPM URL: 
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/yecheng/bstrlib/fedora-rawhide-i386/00585367-bstrlib/bstrlib-1.0.0-1.fc27.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 1474403] Review Request: perl-Env-ShellWords - Environment variables for arguments as a Perl array

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1474403

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||jples...@redhat.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jples...@redhat.com
  Flags||fedora-review?



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

[Bug 1476773] Review Request: python-subunit2sql - Command to Read a subunit file or stream and put the data in a SQL DB

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1476773



--- Comment #2 from Chandan Kumar  ---
Here is the updated spec file with seperated -graph subpackage.
Spec File: https://chandankumar.fedorapeople.org/python-subunit2sql.spec
SRPM:
https://chandankumar.fedorapeople.org/python-subunit2sql-1.8.0-2.fc26.src.rpm

Successful Koji Build:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=20939968

Thanks,

Chandan Kumar

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1476434] Review Request: Bstrlib - Better String Library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1476434



--- Comment #5 from Ye Cheng <18969068...@163.com> ---
(In reply to Ye Cheng from comment #0)
 Spec URL: 
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/yecheng/bstrlib/fedora-rawhide-i386/00585360-bstrlib/bstrlib.spec
 SRPM URL: 
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/yecheng/bstrlib/fedora-rawhide-i386/00585360-bstrlib/bstrlib-1.0.0-1.fc27.src.rpm

Adding a dedicated %check section

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1476790] Review Request: python-stestr - A test runner runner similar to testrepository

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1476790

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|MODIFIED



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

[Bug 1476790] Review Request: python-stestr - A test runner runner similar to testrepository

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1476790



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-stestr-0.5.0-3.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-0c9fb7977a

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #34 from Honggang LI  ---
(In reply to Jarod Wilson from comment #30)
> And now the build fails on ppc64le, while successful on all other arches:
> 
> bin/ib_acme: error while loading shared libraries:
> /builddir/build/BUILD/rdma-core-14/lib/libibverbs.so.1: expected
> localentry:0 `pthread_cond_init'
> error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.X6YP93 (%install)
> RPM build errors:
> Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.X6YP93 (%install)
> 
> For the time being, I've thrown a quick hack into the package to make it at
> least build, and we can debug from there, with the caveat that the ppc64le
> package is at least partially broken at runtime.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1474973#c3

Jarod, please revert this hack as issue had been fixed. Thanks

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1470678] Review Request: perl-Data-Dmp - Dump Perl data structures as Perl code

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1470678

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #1 from Petr Pisar  ---
URL and Source0 addresses are Ok.
Source0 archive (SHA-256:
f2b326d703fb845d9dffd3b8b46d6c5d461143ac8f0f3c94d555ed294f0daf21) is original.
Ok.
Summary verified from lib/Data/Dmp.pm. Ok.

TODO: Remove the space in `compact , starts' in the description.

License verified from lib/Data/Dmp.pm and LICENSE. Ok.
No XS code, noarch BuildArch is Ok.

FIX: Build-require `perl(blib)' for tests (t/00-compile.t:19).

Test::Pod, Test::Pod::Coverage, and Pod::Coverage::TrustPod are not used. Ok.
All tests pass. Ok.

$ rpmlint perl-Data-Dmp.spec ../SRPMS/perl-Data-Dmp-0.23-1.fc27.src.rpm
../RPMS/noarch/perl-Data-Dmp-0.23-1.fc27.noarch.rpm 
perl-Data-Dmp.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Stringify -> Stringy
perl-Data-Dmp.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US regexes -> regexps,
regex's, reg exes
perl-Data-Dmp.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US coderefs -> code
refs, code-refs, recorders
perl-Data-Dmp.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Stringify ->
Stringy
perl-Data-Dmp.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US regexes ->
regexps, regex's, reg exes
perl-Data-Dmp.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US coderefs -> code
refs, code-refs, recorders
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings.
rpmlint is Ok.

$ rpm -q -lv -p ../RPMS/noarch/perl-Data-Dmp-0.23-1.fc27.noarch.rpm
drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 Aug  1 08:20
/usr/share/doc/perl-Data-Dmp
-rw-r--r--1 rootroot 2742 Jan 30  2017
/usr/share/doc/perl-Data-Dmp/Changes
-rw-r--r--1 rootroot 5076 Jan 30  2017
/usr/share/doc/perl-Data-Dmp/README
drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 Aug  1 08:20
/usr/share/doc/perl-Data-Dmp/devscripts
-rw-r--r--1 rootroot 1127 Aug  1 08:20
/usr/share/doc/perl-Data-Dmp/devscripts/bench
drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 Aug  1 08:20
/usr/share/licenses/perl-Data-Dmp
-rw-r--r--1 rootroot18367 Jan 30  2017
/usr/share/licenses/perl-Data-Dmp/LICENSE
-rw-r--r--1 rootroot 4287 Aug  1 08:20
/usr/share/man/man3/Data::Dmp.3pm.gz
drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 Aug  1 08:20
/usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Data
-rw-r--r--1 rootroot11944 Jan 30  2017
/usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Data/Dmp.pm
File layout and permissions are Ok.

$ rpm -q --requires -p ../RPMS/noarch/perl-Data-Dmp-0.23-1.fc27.noarch.rpm |
sort -f | uniq -c
  1 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.26.0)
  1 perl(:VERSION) >= 5.10.1
  1 perl(B::Deparse)
  1 perl(Exporter)
  1 perl(Regexp::Stringify)
  1 perl(Scalar::Util)
  1 perl(strict)
  1 perl(warnings)
  1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
  1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1
  1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
  1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1
Binary requires are Ok.

$ rpm -q --provides -p ../RPMS/noarch/perl-Data-Dmp-0.23-1.fc27.noarch.rpm |
sort -f | uniq -c
  1 perl(Data::Dmp) = 0.23
  1 perl-Data-Dmp = 0.23-1.fc27
Binary provides are Ok.

$ resolvedeps f27-build ../RPMS/noarch/perl-Data-Dmp-0.23-1.fc27.noarch.rpm 
Binary dependencies resolvable. Ok.

Package builds in F27
(https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=20938874). Ok.

Otherwise the package is in line with Fedora and Perl packaging guidelines.

Please correct the `FIX' item and consider fixing the `TODO' item before
building this package.
Resolution: Package APPROVED.

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

[Bug 1470678] Review Request: perl-Data-Dmp - Dump Perl data structures as Perl code

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1470678

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||ppi...@redhat.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ppi...@redhat.com
  Flags||fedora-review?



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