[Bug 1803479] Review Request: libredwg-0.10.1 - new package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803479 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added CC||quantum.anal...@gmail.com Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value --- Comment #2 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- This fails to build: cd perl && \ /usr/bin/perl Makefile.PL INSTALLDIRS=vendor Can't locate ExtUtils/Embed.pm in @INC (you may need to install the ExtUtils::Embed module) (@INC contains: /usr/local/lib64/perl5/5.30 /usr/local/share/perl5/5.30 /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl /usr/lib64/perl5 /usr/share/perl5) at Makefile.PL line 3. BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at Makefile.PL line 3. make[3]: [Makefile:776: perl/Makefile] Error 2 (ignored) Note LibreDWG.c is huge. This will need some time... if test -f perl/pm_to_blib; then rm perl/pm_to_blib; fi if test -d perl/blib; then rm -rf perl/blib; fi if grep "NOOP = rem" perl/Makefile; then false; else \ cd perl && /usr/bin/make OPTIMIZE="-I/builddir/build/BUILD/libredwg-0.10.1/include -I/builddir/build/BUILD/libredwg-0.10.1/src" \ OTHERLDFLAGS="-L/builddir/build/BUILD/libredwg-0.10.1/src/.libs"; fi grep: perl/Makefile: No such file or directory Looks like you're missing BuildRequires: perl(ExtUtils::Embed) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1803320] Review Request: ghc-prettyprinter-ansi-terminal - ANSI terminal backend for the »prettyprinter« package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803320
Elliott Sales de Andrade changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |POST
CC||quantum.anal...@gmail.com
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|quantum.anal...@gmail.com
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Elliott Sales de Andrade ---
licensecheck doesn't recognize the license, but askalono does.
Approved.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
Note: No gcc, gcc-c++ or clang found in BuildRequires
See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/C_and_C++/
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Unknown or generated". 9 files have unknown license. Detailed
output of licensecheck in
1803320-ghc-prettyprinter-ansi-terminal/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.
[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.
[?]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 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]: 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 must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[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
[Bug 1804636] Review Request: ghc-rio - A standard library for Haskell
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1804636 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added CC||quantum.anal...@gmail.com --- Comment #2 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- The link is broken. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1803348] Review Request: ghc-parsers - Parsing combinators
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803348 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added CC||quantum.anal...@gmail.com --- Comment #2 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- The link is broken. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805482] Review Request: golang-github-muesli-reflow - Reflow lets you word-wrap strings or entire blocks of text.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805482
Elliott Sales de Andrade changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |POST
CC||quantum.anal...@gmail.com
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|quantum.anal...@gmail.com
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade ---
Remove . from end of Summary.
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]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla
upstream sources. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "Expat
License". 16 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
licensecheck in 1805482-golang-github-muesli-reflow/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[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.
[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.
[?]: 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]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[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 must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
publishes signatures.
Note: gpgverify is not used.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{b
[Bug 1579403] Review Request: golang-github-soundcloud-runit - go library wrapping runit service status
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1579403 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED CC||quantum.anal...@gmail.com Fixed In Version||golang-github-soundcloud-ru ||nit-0-0.1.20180521git06ad41 ||a.fc29 Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2020-02-21 07:35:32 --- Comment #9 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- Please close your review requests after you have imported and built the package. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1512702] Review Request: golang-github-prometheus-node_exporter - Prometheus exporter for hardware and OS metrics exposed by *NIX kernels
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1512702 Bug 1512702 depends on bug 1579403, which changed state. Bug 1579403 Summary: Review Request: golang-github-soundcloud-runit - go library wrapping runit service status https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1579403 What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1578564] Review Request: golang-github-mdlayher-wifi - Provides access to IEEE 802.11 WiFi device actions and statistics
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1578564 Bug 1578564 depends on bug 1578562, which changed state. Bug 1578562 Summary: Review Request: golang-github-mdlayher-genetlink - Generic netlink interactions and data types https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1578562 What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1512702] Review Request: golang-github-prometheus-node_exporter - Prometheus exporter for hardware and OS metrics exposed by *NIX kernels
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1512702 Bug 1512702 depends on bug 1577953, which changed state. Bug 1577953 Summary: Review Request: golang-github-kolo-xmlrpc - Implementation of XMLRPC protocol in Go language https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1577953 What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1578562] Review Request: golang-github-mdlayher-genetlink - Generic netlink interactions and data types
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1578562 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED CC||quantum.anal...@gmail.com Fixed In Version||golang-github-mdlayher-gene ||tlink-0-0.1.20180517git76fe ||cce.fc29 Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2020-02-21 07:34:54 --- Comment #6 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- Please close your review requests after you have imported and built the package. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1577953] Review Request: golang-github-kolo-xmlrpc - Implementation of XMLRPC protocol in Go language
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1577953 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED CC||quantum.anal...@gmail.com Fixed In Version||golang-github-kolo-xmlrpc-0 ||-0.1.20180515git0826b98.fc2 ||9 Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2020-02-21 07:34:23 --- Comment #6 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- Please close your review requests after you have imported and built the package. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1512702] Review Request: golang-github-prometheus-node_exporter - Prometheus exporter for hardware and OS metrics exposed by *NIX kernels
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1512702 Bug 1512702 depends on bug 1578562, which changed state. Bug 1578562 Summary: Review Request: golang-github-mdlayher-genetlink - Generic netlink interactions and data types https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1578562 What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1576519] Review Request: golang-github-ema-qdisc - qdisc allows to get queuing discipline information via netlink
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1576519 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED CC||quantum.anal...@gmail.com Fixed In Version||golang-github-ema-qdisc-0-0 ||.1.20180511gitb307c22.fc29 Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2020-02-21 07:33:37 --- Comment #5 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- Please close your review requests after you have imported and built the package. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1576519] Review Request: golang-github-ema-qdisc - qdisc allows to get queuing discipline information via netlink
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1576519 Bug 1576519 depends on bug 1534052, which changed state. Bug 1534052 Summary: Review Request: golang-github-mdlayher-netlink - Package netlink provides low-level access to Linux netlink sockets https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1534052 What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1512702] Review Request: golang-github-prometheus-node_exporter - Prometheus exporter for hardware and OS metrics exposed by *NIX kernels
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1512702 Bug 1512702 depends on bug 1534052, which changed state. Bug 1534052 Summary: Review Request: golang-github-mdlayher-netlink - Package netlink provides low-level access to Linux netlink sockets https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1534052 What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1512702] Review Request: golang-github-prometheus-node_exporter - Prometheus exporter for hardware and OS metrics exposed by *NIX kernels
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1512702 Bug 1512702 depends on bug 1576519, which changed state. Bug 1576519 Summary: Review Request: golang-github-ema-qdisc - qdisc allows to get queuing discipline information via netlink https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1576519 What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1534052] Review Request: golang-github-mdlayher-netlink - Package netlink provides low-level access to Linux netlink sockets
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1534052 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED CC||quantum.anal...@gmail.com Fixed In Version||golang-github-mdlayher-netl ||ink-0-0.1.20180511gitf8bbad ||5.fc29 Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2020-02-21 07:33:03 --- Comment #13 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- Please close your review requests after you have imported and built the package. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1246588] Review Request: golang-github-rwcarlsen-goexif - Decode embedded EXIF meta data from image files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246588 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED CC||quantum.anal...@gmail.com Resolution|--- |NOTABUG Last Closed||2020-02-21 07:27:41 --- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- This exists. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1246549] Review Request: golang-github-cznic-zappy - Package zappy implements the zappy block-based compression format
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246549 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED CC||quantum.anal...@gmail.com Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Last Closed||2020-02-21 07:25:27 --- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1431743 *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1431743] Review Request: golang-github-cznic-zappy - Block-based compression format implementation in Go
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1431743 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jchal...@redhat.com --- Comment #15 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- *** Bug 1246549 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1246528] Review Request: golang-github-cznic-sortutil - Utilities supplemental to the Go standard "sort" package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246528 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED CC||quantum.anal...@gmail.com Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Last Closed||2020-02-21 07:24:55 --- Comment #2 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1431735 *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1431735] Review Request: golang-github-cznic-sortutil - Supplemental utilities for Go's sort package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1431735 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jchal...@redhat.com --- Comment #14 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- *** Bug 1246528 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1246537] Review Request: golang-github-cznic-fileutil - Package fileutil collects some file utility functions
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246537 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED CC||quantum.anal...@gmail.com Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Last Closed||2020-02-21 07:24:07 --- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1431732 *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1431732] Review Request: golang-github-cznic-fileutil - File utility functions for Go
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1431732 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jchal...@redhat.com --- Comment #13 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- *** Bug 1246537 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1246469] Review Request: golang-github-golang-leveldb - The LevelDB key-value database in the Go programming language
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246469 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED CC||quantum.anal...@gmail.com Resolution|--- |NOTABUG Last Closed||2020-02-21 07:22:21 --- Comment #2 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- This exists as golang-github-leveldb. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805564] Review Request: golang-gopkg-jcmturner-gokrb5-5 - Pure Go Kerberos library for clients and services
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805564 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||180 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=180 [Bug 180] Review Request: golang-gopkg-jcmturner-aescts-1 - AES CBC Ciphertext Stealing mode for Go -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805555] Review Request: golang-gopkg-jcmturner-aescts-1 - AES CBC Ciphertext Stealing mode for Go
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=180 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1805564 Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |b'golang-gopkg-jcmturner-ae |golang-gopkg-jcmturner-aesc |scts-1' - b'AES CBC |ts-1 - AES CBC Ciphertext |Ciphertext Stealing mode|Stealing mode for Go |for Go' | Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805564 [Bug 1805564] Review Request: golang-gopkg-jcmturner-gokrb5-5 - Pure Go Kerberos library for clients and services -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1801074] Review Request: php-sebastian-finder-facade2 - Wrapper for Symfony Finder component version 2
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1801074 Remi Collet changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1805498 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805498 [Bug 1805498] php-phpunit-phploc-6.0.0 is available -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1800772] Review Request: php-sebastian-version3 - Managing the version number of Git-hosted PHP projects
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1800772 Remi Collet changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1805498 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805498 [Bug 1805498] php-phpunit-phploc-6.0.0 is available -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1802357] Review Request: golang-github-viant-toolbox - Go utility library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1802357
Elliott Sales de Andrade changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |POST
CC||quantum.anal...@gmail.com
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|quantum.anal...@gmail.com
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade ---
Approved.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla
upstream sources. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "*No
copyright* Apache License (v2.0)". 180 files have unknown license.
Detailed output of licensecheck in
1802357-golang-github-viant-toolbox/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[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.
[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.
[?]: 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 30720 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]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[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 must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
publishes signatures.
Note: gpgverify is not used.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with r
[Bug 1802337] Review Request: golang-github-marten-seemann-qpack - A (minimal) QPACK implementation in Go
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1802337
Elliott Sales de Andrade changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |POST
CC||quantum.anal...@gmail.com
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|quantum.anal...@gmail.com
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade ---
Approved.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla
upstream sources. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "Expat
License". 21 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
licensecheck in
1802337-golang-github-marten-seemann-qpack/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[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.
[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.
[?]: 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 163840 bytes in 3 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[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 must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
publishes signatures.
Note: gpgverify is not used.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (o
[Bug 1802335] Review Request: golang-github-marten-seemann-chacha20 - ChaCha20 in Go
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1802335
Elliott Sales de Andrade changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||quantum.anal...@gmail.com
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|quantum.anal...@gmail.com
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
Flags||fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade ---
Ask upstream to provide the LICENSE file:
https://github.com/marten-seemann/chacha20/issues/1
It looks like one file is OpenSSL license?
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.
[-]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla
upstream sources. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "OpenSSL
License". 14 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
licensecheck in
1802335-golang-github-marten-seemann-chacha20/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[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.
[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.
[?]: 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]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[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 must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[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).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
publishes signatures.
Note: gpgverify is not used.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[x]: Reviewer s
[Bug 1801889] Review Request: golang-github-benlaurie-gds-registers - Go API for GDS registers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1801889
Elliott Sales de Andrade changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |POST
CC||quantum.anal...@gmail.com
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|quantum.anal...@gmail.com
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade ---
Approved.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla
upstream sources. Licenses found: "*No copyright* Apache License
(v2.0)", "Unknown or generated". 4 files have unknown license.
Detailed output of licensecheck in
1801889-golang-github-benlaurie-gds-registers/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[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.
[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.
[?]: 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]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[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 must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
publishes signatures.
Note: gpgverify is not used.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section wi
[Bug 1801881] Review Request: golang-gopkg-redis-6 - Type-safe Redis client for Golang
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1801881
Elliott Sales de Andrade changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||quantum.anal...@gmail.com
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|quantum.anal...@gmail.com
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
Flags||fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade ---
Seems to be BSD and ASL 2.0.
Can you not run tests like in golang-gopkg-redis-2?
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]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla
upstream sources. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "BSD
2-clause "Simplified" License", "Apache License (v2.0)". 66 files have
unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
1801881-golang-gopkg-redis-6/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[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.
[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.
[?]: 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 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]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[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 must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
publishes signatures.
Note: gpgverify is not used.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[!]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the packag
[Bug 1801843] Review Request: golang-github-antihax-optional - Optional parameters for Go
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1801843
Elliott Sales de Andrade changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |POST
CC||quantum.anal...@gmail.com
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|quantum.anal...@gmail.com
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade ---
Approved.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla
upstream sources. Licenses found: "Expat License", "Unknown or
generated". 22 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
licensecheck in 1801843-golang-github-antihax-optional/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[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.
[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.
[?]: 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]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[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 must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
publishes signatures.
Note: gpgverify is not used.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$R
[Bug 1802343] Review Request: golang-github-alangpierce-forceexport - Access unexported functions from other packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1802343
Elliott Sales de Andrade changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |POST
CC||quantum.anal...@gmail.com
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|quantum.anal...@gmail.com
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade ---
Well this looks like a terrible little package...
Approved.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla
upstream sources. Licenses found: "Expat License", "Unknown or
generated". 3 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
licensecheck in
1802343-golang-github-alangpierce-forceexport/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[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.
[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.
[?]: 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]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[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 must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
justified.
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
publishes signatures.
Note: gpgverify is not used.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[x]: Reviewer sh
[Bug 1801893] Review Request: golang-github-mohae-deepcopy - Deep copy things
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1801893
Elliott Sales de Andrade changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||quantum.anal...@gmail.com
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|quantum.anal...@gmail.com
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade ---
Approved.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla
upstream sources. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "Expat
License". 4 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
licensecheck in 1801893-golang-github-mohae-deepcopy/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[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.
[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.
[?]: 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]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[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 must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
publishes signatures.
Note: gpgverify is not used.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc,
[Bug 1804120] Review Request: golang-github-yuin-goldmark-highlighting - A Syntax highlighting extension for the goldmark markdown parser
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1804120 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1777284 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1777284 [Bug 1777284] hugo-0.65.1 is available -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805580] Review Request: golang-github-bep-golibsass - Easy to use Go bindings for LibSass
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805580 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1777284 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1777284 [Bug 1777284] hugo-0.65.1 is available -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805580] Review Request: golang-github-bep-golibsass - Easy to use Go bindings for LibSass
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805580 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |b'golang-github-bep-golibsa |golang-github-bep-golibsass |ss' - b'Easy to use Go |- Easy to use Go bindings |bindings for LibSass' |for LibSass Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805580] Review Request: b'golang-github-bep-golibsass' - b'Easy to use Go bindings for LibSass'
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805580 --- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=41716595 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805580] New: Review Request: b'golang-github-bep-golibsass' - b'Easy to use Go bindings for LibSass'
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805580 Bug ID: 1805580 Summary: Review Request: b'golang-github-bep-golibsass' - b'Easy to use Go bindings for LibSass' Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: quantum.anal...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//golang-github-bep-golibsass.spec SRPM URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//golang-github-bep-golibsass-0.5.0-1.fc30.src.rpm Description: b'\nEasy to use Go bindings for LibSass. The primary motivation for this project is\nto provide SCSS support to Hugo.\n\n%gopkg' -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805566] Review Request: golang-github-dpotapov-spnego - Cross-platform HTTP calls with Kerberos authentication
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805566 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1793882 Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |b'golang-github-dpotapov-sp |golang-github-dpotapov-spne |nego' - b'Wraps gokrb5 and |go - Cross-platform HTTP |sspi libraries to provide |calls with Kerberos |cross-platform way to make |authentication |HTTP calls with Kerberos| |authentication' | Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1793882 [Bug 1793882] git-lfs-2.10.0 is available -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805564] Review Request: golang-gopkg-jcmturner-gokrb5-5 - Pure Go Kerberos library for clients and services
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805564 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1805566 Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |b'golang-gopkg-jcmturner-go |golang-gopkg-jcmturner-gokr |krb5-5' - b'Pure Go |b5-5 - Pure Go Kerberos |Kerberos library for|library for clients and |clients and services' |services Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805566 [Bug 1805566] Review Request: b'golang-github-dpotapov-spnego' - b'Wraps gokrb5 and sspi libraries to provide cross-platform way to make HTTP calls with Kerberos authentication' -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805566] Review Request: b'golang-github-dpotapov-spnego' - b'Wraps gokrb5 and sspi libraries to provide cross-platform way to make HTTP calls with Kerberos authentication'
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805566 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1805564 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805564 [Bug 1805564] Review Request: golang-gopkg-jcmturner-gokrb5-5 - Pure Go Kerberos library for clients and services -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1803097] Review Request: mangohud - Vulkan overlay layer for monitoring FPS, temperatures, CPU/GPU load and more
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803097 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-02-21 02:53:08 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System --- mangohud-0.2.0-11.fc31 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805566] New: Review Request: b'golang-github-dpotapov-spnego' - b'Wraps gokrb5 and sspi libraries to provide cross-platform way to make HTTP calls with Kerberos authentication'
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805566 Bug ID: 1805566 Summary: Review Request: b'golang-github-dpotapov-spnego' - b'Wraps gokrb5 and sspi libraries to provide cross-platform way to make HTTP calls with Kerberos authentication' Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: quantum.anal...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//golang-github-dpotapov-spnego.spec SRPM URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//golang-github-dpotapov-spnego-0-0.1.20200221gitc2c6091.fc30.src.rpm Description: b'\nWraps gokrb5 and sspi libraries to provide cross-platform way to make HTTP\ncalls with Kerberos authentication.\n\n%gopkg' -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805562] Review Request: golang-github-jcmturner-gofork - Forked Go standard library packages with work arounds
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805562 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1805564 Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |b'golang-github-jcmturner-g |golang-github-jcmturner-gof |ofork' - b'Forked Go|ork - Forked Go standard |standard library packages |library packages with work |with work arounds' |arounds Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805564 [Bug 1805564] Review Request: b'golang-gopkg-jcmturner-gokrb5-5' - b'Pure Go Kerberos library for clients and services' -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805564] Review Request: b'golang-gopkg-jcmturner-gokrb5-5' - b'Pure Go Kerberos library for clients and services'
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805564 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1805562 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805562 [Bug 1805562] Review Request: golang-github-jcmturner-gofork - Forked Go standard library packages with work arounds -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805564] Review Request: b'golang-gopkg-jcmturner-gokrb5-5' - b'Pure Go Kerberos library for clients and services'
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805564 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1805556 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805556 [Bug 1805556] Review Request: golang-gopkg-jcmturner-dnsutils-1 - DNS utilities for Go -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805564] Review Request: b'golang-gopkg-jcmturner-gokrb5-5' - b'Pure Go Kerberos library for clients and services'
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805564 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1805557 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805557 [Bug 1805557] Review Request: golang-gopkg-jcmturner-goidentity-2 - Go interface for authenticated identities and attributes -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805557] Review Request: golang-gopkg-jcmturner-goidentity-2 - Go interface for authenticated identities and attributes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805557 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1805564 Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |b'golang-gopkg-jcmturner-go |golang-gopkg-jcmturner-goid |identity-2' - b'Go |entity-2 - Go interface for |interface for authenticated |authenticated identities |identities and attributes' |and attributes Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805564 [Bug 1805564] Review Request: b'golang-gopkg-jcmturner-gokrb5-5' - b'Pure Go Kerberos library for clients and services' -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805564] Review Request: b'golang-gopkg-jcmturner-gokrb5-5' - b'Pure Go Kerberos library for clients and services'
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805564 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1805559 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805559 [Bug 1805559] Review Request: golang-gopkg-jcmturner-rpc-0 - Remote Procedure Call libraries -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805556] Review Request: golang-gopkg-jcmturner-dnsutils-1 - DNS utilities for Go
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805556 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1805564 Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |b'golang-gopkg-jcmturner-dn |golang-gopkg-jcmturner-dnsu |sutils-1' - b'DNS utilities |tils-1 - DNS utilities for |for Go' |Go Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805564 [Bug 1805564] Review Request: b'golang-gopkg-jcmturner-gokrb5-5' - b'Pure Go Kerberos library for clients and services' -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805559] Review Request: golang-gopkg-jcmturner-rpc-0 - Remote Procedure Call libraries
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805559 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1805564 Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |b'golang-gopkg-jcmturner-rp |golang-gopkg-jcmturner-rpc- |c-0' - b'Remote Procedure |0 - Remote Procedure Call |Call libraries' |libraries Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805564 [Bug 1805564] Review Request: b'golang-gopkg-jcmturner-gokrb5-5' - b'Pure Go Kerberos library for clients and services' -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805564] New: Review Request: b'golang-gopkg-jcmturner-gokrb5-5' - b'Pure Go Kerberos library for clients and services'
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805564 Bug ID: 1805564 Summary: Review Request: b'golang-gopkg-jcmturner-gokrb5-5' - b'Pure Go Kerberos library for clients and services' Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: quantum.anal...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//golang-gopkg-jcmturner-gokrb5-5.spec SRPM URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//golang-gopkg-jcmturner-gokrb5-5-5.3.0-1.fc30.src.rpm Description: b'\nPure Go Kerberos library for clients and services.\n\n%gopkg' -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805562] Review Request: b'golang-github-jcmturner-gofork' - b'Forked Go standard library packages with work arounds'
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805562 --- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=41715155 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805562] New: Review Request: b'golang-github-jcmturner-gofork' - b'Forked Go standard library packages with work arounds'
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805562 Bug ID: 1805562 Summary: Review Request: b'golang-github-jcmturner-gofork' - b'Forked Go standard library packages with work arounds' Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: quantum.anal...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//golang-github-jcmturner-gofork.spec SRPM URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//golang-github-jcmturner-gofork-1.0.0-1.fc30.src.rpm Description: b'\nForked and modified Go standard library packages to work around issues.\n\n%gopkg' -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805559] Review Request: b'golang-gopkg-jcmturner-rpc-0' - b'Remote Procedure Call libraries'
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805559 --- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=41714683 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805559] New: Review Request: b'golang-gopkg-jcmturner-rpc-0' - b'Remote Procedure Call libraries'
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805559 Bug ID: 1805559 Summary: Review Request: b'golang-gopkg-jcmturner-rpc-0' - b'Remote Procedure Call libraries' Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: quantum.anal...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//golang-gopkg-jcmturner-rpc-0.spec SRPM URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//golang-gopkg-jcmturner-rpc-0-0.0.2-1.fc30.src.rpm Description: b'\nRemote Procedure Call libraries\n(https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9629399/).\n\n%gopkg' -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805557] Review Request: b'golang-gopkg-jcmturner-goidentity-2' - b'Go interface for authenticated identities and attributes'
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805557 --- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=41714601 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805557] New: Review Request: b'golang-gopkg-jcmturner-goidentity-2' - b'Go interface for authenticated identities and attributes'
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805557 Bug ID: 1805557 Summary: Review Request: b'golang-gopkg-jcmturner-goidentity-2' - b'Go interface for authenticated identities and attributes' Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: quantum.anal...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//golang-gopkg-jcmturner-goidentity-2.spec SRPM URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//golang-gopkg-jcmturner-goidentity-2-2.0.0-1.fc30.src.rpm Description: b'\nStandard interface for holding authenticated identities and their attributes.\n\n%gopkg' -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805556] Review Request: b'golang-gopkg-jcmturner-dnsutils-1' - b'DNS utilities for Go'
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805556 --- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=41714493 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805556] New: Review Request: b'golang-gopkg-jcmturner-dnsutils-1' - b'DNS utilities for Go'
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805556 Bug ID: 1805556 Summary: Review Request: b'golang-gopkg-jcmturner-dnsutils-1' - b'DNS utilities for Go' Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: quantum.anal...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//golang-gopkg-jcmturner-dnsutils-1.spec SRPM URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//golang-gopkg-jcmturner-dnsutils-1-1.0.1-1.fc30.src.rpm Description: b'\nDNS utilities for Go.\n\n%gopkg' -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805555] Review Request: b'golang-gopkg-jcmturner-aescts-1' - b'AES CBC Ciphertext Stealing mode for Go'
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=180 --- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=41714407 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805555] New: Review Request: b'golang-gopkg-jcmturner-aescts-1' - b'AES CBC Ciphertext Stealing mode for Go'
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=180 Bug ID: 180 Summary: Review Request: b'golang-gopkg-jcmturner-aescts-1' - b'AES CBC Ciphertext Stealing mode for Go' Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: quantum.anal...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//golang-gopkg-jcmturner-aescts-1.spec SRPM URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//golang-gopkg-jcmturner-aescts-1-1.0.1-1.fc30.src.rpm Description: b'\nAES CBC Ciphertext Stealing mode for Go.\n\n%gopkg' -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1803097] Review Request: mangohud - Vulkan overlay layer for monitoring FPS, temperatures, CPU/GPU load and more
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803097 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System --- mangohud-0.2.0-11.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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-2020-858aaa31de -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1796268] Review Request: nodejs-p-try - Starts a promise chain
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1796268 Sergio Monteiro Basto changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2020-02-21 00:49:30 --- Comment #12 from Sergio Monteiro Basto --- Package built in rawhide F32 and F31 . 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1803281] Review Request: fonts-rpm-macros - rpm automation for fonts packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803281 --- Comment #8 from Gwyn Ciesla --- Anytime. :) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1803281] Review Request: fonts-rpm-macros - rpm automation for fonts packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803281 --- Comment #7 from Nicolas Mailhot --- Thanks a lot for the admin work! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1803281] Review Request: fonts-rpm-macros - rpm automation for fonts packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803281 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2020-02-20 22:17:39 --- Comment #6 from Nicolas Mailhot --- And it is built for f33 & 32: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1467739 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1467741 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805509] New: Review Request: rust-cargo-platform - Cargo's representation of a target platform
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805509 Bug ID: 1805509 Summary: Review Request: rust-cargo-platform - Cargo's representation of a target platform Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: jist...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://jistone.fedorapeople.org/review//rust-cargo-platform.spec SRPM URL: https://jistone.fedorapeople.org/review//rust-cargo-platform-0.1.0-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: Cargo's representation of a target platform. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805509] Review Request: rust-cargo-platform - Cargo's representation of a target platform
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805509 --- Comment #1 from Josh Stone --- This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=41707980 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1803281] Review Request: fonts-rpm-macros - rpm automation for fonts packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803281 --- Comment #5 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fonts-rpm-macros -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1803302] Review Request: github-cli - The GitHub CLI
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803302 --- Comment #4 from Joe Doss --- (In reply to Omair Majid from comment #3) > Drive-by suggestion: Can you use SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH instead of $(date > +%Y-%m-%d)? That would make this build more reproducible. Thanks for this Omair. Updated my spec to use SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH. GitHub released 0.5.6 already with another dependency that has two other dependencies. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805482 is one of them. I am having trouble building the other which I emailed Robert-André off BZ to figure out how to handle/package. I will update this BZ with the updated spec and srpm once that is sorted out. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805482] Review Request: golang-github-muesli-reflow - Reflow lets you word-wrap strings or entire blocks of text.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805482 Joe Doss changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1803302 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803302 [Bug 1803302] Review Request: github-cli - The GitHub CLI -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1803302] Review Request: github-cli - The GitHub CLI
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803302 Joe Doss changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1805482 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805482 [Bug 1805482] Review Request: golang-github-muesli-reflow - Reflow lets you word-wrap strings or entire blocks of text. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1803281] Review Request: fonts-rpm-macros - rpm automation for fonts packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803281 --- Comment #4 from Nicolas Mailhot --- Thanks, I fixed the improperly wrapped lines here https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/nim/fonts-rpm-macros/build/1246667/ now I will proceed to fedpkg import -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805482] New: Review Request: golang-github-muesli-reflow - Reflow lets you word-wrap strings or entire blocks of text.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805482 Bug ID: 1805482 Summary: Review Request: golang-github-muesli-reflow - Reflow lets you word-wrap strings or entire blocks of text. Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: j...@solidadmin.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/jdoss/github/fedora-31-x86_64/01246658-golang-github-muesli-reflow/golang-github-muesli-reflow.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/jdoss/github/fedora-31-x86_64/01246658-golang-github-muesli-reflow/golang-github-muesli-reflow-0-0.1.20200220gitcf7e7ea.fc31.src.rpm Description: Reflow lets you word-wrap strings or entire blocks of text. It follows the io.Writer interface and supports ANSI escape sequences. Fedora Account System Username: jdoss -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1803310] Review Request: golang-github-vilmibm-termd - Package termd provides terminal markdown rendering, with code block syntax highlighting support
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803310 --- Comment #2 from Joe Doss --- I packaged the older version because they didn't tag 0.2.0 correctly and I didn't know about using %global tag. $ spectool -R -g SPECS/golang-github-vilmibm-termd.spec Getting https://github.com/vilmibm/go-termd/archive/v0.2.0/go-termd-0.2.0.tar.gz to /home/jdoss/rpmbuild/SOURCES/go-termd-0.2.0.tar.gz % Total% Received % Xferd Average Speed TimeTime Time Current Dload Upload Total SpentLeft Speed 100 1390 1390 0482 0 --:--:-- --:--:-- --:--:-- 482 0 00 00 0 0 0 --:--:-- --:--:-- --:--:-- 0 curl: (22) The requested URL returned error: 404 Not Found using: Version:0.2.0 %global tag 0.2.0 works: $ spectool -R -g SPECS/golang-github-vilmibm-termd.spec Getting https://github.com/vilmibm/go-termd/archive/0.2.0/go-termd-0.2.0.tar.gz to /home/jdoss/rpmbuild/SOURCES/go-termd-0.2.0.tar.gz % Total% Received % Xferd Average Speed TimeTime Time Current Dload Upload Total SpentLeft Speed 100 1230 1230 0480 0 --:--:-- --:--:-- --:--:-- 480 100 91020 91020 0 18575 0 --:--:-- --:--:-- --:--:-- 18575 - Packaged latest version. https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/jdoss/github/fedora-31-x86_64/01246641-golang-github-vilmibm-termd/golang-github-vilmibm-termd.spec https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/jdoss/github/fedora-31-x86_64/01246641-golang-github-vilmibm-termd/golang-github-vilmibm-termd-0.2.0-1.fc31.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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1803309] Review Request: golang-github-netflix-expect - An expect-like golang library to automate control of terminal or console based programs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803309 --- Comment #2 from Joe Doss --- - Trimmed the summary down. https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/jdoss/github/fedora-31-x86_64/01246627-golang-github-netflix-expect/golang-github-netflix-expect.spec https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/jdoss/github/fedora-31-x86_64/01246627-golang-github-netflix-expect/golang-github-netflix-expect-0-0.1.20200214git0e00d91.fc31.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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1803312] Review Request: golang-github-hinshun-vt10x - Package vt10x is a vt10x terminal emulation backend
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803312 --- Comment #2 from Joe Doss --- - Removed extra dot in description. https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/jdoss/github/fedora-31-x86_64/01246623-golang-github-hinshun-vt10x/golang-github-hinshun-vt10x.spec https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/jdoss/github/fedora-31-x86_64/01246623-golang-github-hinshun-vt10x/golang-github-hinshun-vt10x-0-0.1.20200214gitd55458d.fc31.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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1803303] Review Request: golang-github-alecaivazis-survey - A golang library for building interactive prompts
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803303 --- Comment #2 from Joe Doss --- - Version updated. - Tag removed. - Summary trimmed down. https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/jdoss/github/fedora-31-x86_64/01246624-golang-github-alecaivazis-survey/golang-github-alecaivazis-survey.spec https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/jdoss/github/fedora-31-x86_64/01246624-golang-github-alecaivazis-survey/golang-github-alecaivazis-survey-2.0.5-1.fc31.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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1803281] Review Request: fonts-rpm-macros - rpm automation for fonts packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803281 Gwyn Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Gwyn Ciesla --- 1. Leave it then. :) 2. Less than 80 chars per line. 3. Ok. 4. No, that's cool. I trust you to correct these things prior to import. 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1796268] Review Request: nodejs-p-try - Starts a promise chain
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1796268 --- Comment #11 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/nodejs-p-try -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1803281] Review Request: fonts-rpm-macros - rpm automation for fonts packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803281 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot --- Thanks for the review! So, to answer: 1. no %build section → this is normal, the package is not transforming source files, only ventilating them on the filesystem. Do you want me to add an empty %build section? I prefer avoiding those, we’ve had cases when buggy debuginfo (or other) macros assumed %build presence meant something happened in build, and specs with empty build sections failed in koji. But, in the absence of such bugs empty build sections are generally harmless 2. description is too long → what would be the correct description length for you? It does not seem especially long to me (way shorter than the description of glibc or systemd, for example) 3. Changelog lacks versions But it does include versions (it was one of the approved changelog formats, back when FPC cared about such things, and rpmbuild & friends have no difficulty parsing it) 4. and includes emoji. It’s valid UTF-8 and I like to make use of the fonts I package for Fedora;). https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_spec_file_encoding I can remove it if you feel strongly about it -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1796268] Review Request: nodejs-p-try - Starts a promise chain
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1796268 Sergio Monteiro Basto changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Package review request -|Review Request: |nodejs-p-try|nodejs-p-try - Starts a ||promise chain --- Comment #10 from Sergio Monteiro Basto --- TIL , Thank you Spec URL: https://sergiomb.fedorapeople.org/nodejs-p-try/nodejs-p-try.spec SRPM URL: https://sergiomb.fedorapeople.org/nodejs-p-try/nodejs-p-try-2.0.0-1.fc31.src.rpm Description: Starts a promise chain Fedora Account System Username: sergiomb -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1803281] Review Request: fonts-rpm-macros - rpm automation for fonts packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803281
Gwyn Ciesla changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Gwyn Ciesla ---
? MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build
produces. The output should be posted in the review.
Most of rpmlint's output can be ignored for this case. %build section is
missing, and description is too long.
+ MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines
+ MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption. [2] .
+ MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
+ MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines .
+ MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license. [3]
+ MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package must be included in %license.[4]
+ MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [5]
? MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [6]
Changelog lacks versions, and includes emoji.
+ MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use sha256sum for this task as it
is used by the sources file once imported into git. If no upstream URL can be
specified for this package, please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to
deal with this.
+ MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture. [7]
N/A MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line. [8]
+ MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires. [9]
+ MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.[10]
+ MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.[11]
N/A MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker. [12]
+ MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not
create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does
create that directory. [13]
+ MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file’s
%files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific situations)[14]
+ MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
with executable permissions, for example. [15]
+ MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. [16]
+ MUST: The package must contain code, or permissible content. [17]
N/A MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The
definition of large is left up to the packager’s best judgement, but is not
restricted to size. Large can refer to either size or quantity). [18]
+ MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime
of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run
properly if it is not present. [19]
N/A MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [20]
N/A MUST: Development files must be in a -devel package. [21]
N/A MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} =
%{version}-%{release} [22]
+ MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be
removed in the spec if they are built.[23]
N/A MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the
%install section. If you feel that your packaged GUI application does not need
a .desktop file, you must put a comment in the spec file with your explanation.
[24]
N/A MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages. The rule of thumb here is that the first package to be installed
should own the files or directories that other packages may rely upon. This
means, for example, that no package in Fedora should ever share ownership with
any of the files or directories owned by the filesystem or man package. If you
feel that you have a good reason to own a file or directory that anothe
[Bug 1803281] Review Request: fonts-rpm-macros - rpm automation for fonts packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803281 Gwyn Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||gw...@protonmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|gw...@protonmail.com Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805387] Review Request: rust-maybe-uninit - MaybeUninit for friends of backwards compatibility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805387 --- Comment #1 from Josh Stone --- This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=41699147 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1805387] New: Review Request: rust-maybe-uninit - MaybeUninit for friends of backwards compatibility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1805387 Bug ID: 1805387 Summary: Review Request: rust-maybe-uninit - MaybeUninit for friends of backwards compatibility Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: jist...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://jistone.fedorapeople.org/review//rust-maybe-uninit.spec SRPM URL: https://jistone.fedorapeople.org/review//rust-maybe-uninit-2.0.0-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: MaybeUninit for friends of backwards compatibility. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1760617] Review Request: mmc - A GPU mesh-based Monte Carlo photon simulator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1760617 --- Comment #34 from Qianqian Fang --- thanks. it was not just arm, but all platforms other than i686 and x86_64. see https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=41672272 so I did the following: 1. tweaked my Makefile so that it can compile on non ix86/x86_64 platforms 2. recreated a release, and updated the source file 3. updated the spec file using %ifarch after this update, I was able to compile on all platforms, see https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=41698953 However I want to mention that the simulation results on other platforms are not quite correct. I will leave this for further source code updates. For packaging, I think this should be sufficient. Please let me know what you think. both spec and srpm files are updated. Spec URL: https://github.com/fangq/fedorapkg/blob/mmclab/mmc.spec SRPM URL: https://kwafoo.coe.neu.edu/~fangq/share/temp/mmc-1.7.9-1.fc30.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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1796268] Package review request - nodejs-p-try
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1796268 --- Comment #9 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) --- (In reply to Sergio Monteiro Basto from comment #8) > (In reply to Fabio Valentini from comment #7) > > You might want to fix the bug title to confirm to the expected template > > before requesting the repo. > > what do you mean ? The summary of the bug needs to be of the form: Review Request: - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Fedora&format=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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1778530] Review Request: libfido2 - FIDO2 libraries and utilities for support of U2F / WebAuthn
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1778530 Gary Buhrmaster changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2020-02-20 16:58:54 --- Comment #15 from Gary Buhrmaster --- Bodhi says that the package has been pushed to stable for rawhide and f32 (and I have submitted a bodhi request to make the package available for f30 and f31). f30 bodhi status: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-46be289c16 f31 bodhi status: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-2c9f72bbaa As I understand the new package process (and as this is my first package I am still muddling through), that means it is now appropriate to close this new package request ticket (and I will). btw, yubico released a minor patch update (1.3.1 from 1.3.0) to pull in a few minor changes just yesterday. I'll try to get to creating an update when they post the signature on their official release site (it was not yet available yesterday). Thank you to everyone that helped in getting this new package request complete. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1796268] Package review request - nodejs-p-try
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1796268 --- Comment #8 from Sergio Monteiro Basto --- (In reply to Fabio Valentini from comment #7) > You might want to fix the bug title to confirm to the expected template > before requesting the repo. what do you mean ? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1803097] Review Request: mangohud - Vulkan overlay layer for monitoring FPS, temperatures, CPU/GPU load and more
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803097 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-858aaa31de has been submitted as an update to Fedora 30. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-858aaa31de -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1803097] Review Request: mangohud - Vulkan overlay layer for monitoring FPS, temperatures, CPU/GPU load and more
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803097 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-89149c5e26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-89149c5e26 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1802177] Review Request: elementary-tweaks - tweak tool for pantheon de
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1802177
Fabio Valentini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||decatho...@gmail.com
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
--- Comment #3 from Fabio Valentini ---
Hi!
A few hints for a first-time packager (with line numbers, so you can see that I
mean directly).
0) Use "raw" links when hosting files on GitHub for a package review. The
`fedora-review` tool will try to fetch the .spec and .src.rpm files from the
URLs listed, and the URLs you entered will return GitHub's UI instead of the
raw files. There's a "Raw" button on the right, which gives you the direct
download link to for the files.
1) You don't need to define srcname if your setting it to the package name
anyway, just use %{name} instead, it's defined by the "Name: foo" line.
https://github.com/a-mere-peasant/elementary-tweaks-fedora/blob/d0f5ef5/Packages/tweaks/elementary-tweaks.spec#L2
2) There's a typo in the package summary. Also, it's good form to not repeat
the package name in the Summary, but be more descriptive ("Tweak settings for
the Pantheon DE", or something like that).
https://github.com/a-mere-peasant/elementary-tweaks-fedora/blob/d0f5ef5/Packages/tweaks/elementary-tweaks.spec#L5
3) The .spec is missing a URL that points to the upstream project. Add one like
this, just above the Source0 line:
URL: https://correct.url.here/elementary-tweaks
4) The Source0 is an unqualified tarball that does not reference the package
version. This will lead to problems.
Does the project offer downloads for specific versions? If so, use those URLs
instead (and use the %{version} macro), which will help make some things easier
later (including automatic release monitoring by fedora infrastructure).
https://github.com/a-mere-peasant/elementary-tweaks-fedora/blob/d0f5ef5/Packages/tweaks/elementary-tweaks.spec#L10
5) You don't need to add both switchboard-devel and pkgconfig(switchboard-2.0)
as build dependencies. These resolve to the same package (switchboard-devel).
Remove the switchboard-devel BuildRequires and leave the
pkgconfig(switchboard-2.0) dependency.
https://github.com/a-mere-peasant/elementary-tweaks-fedora/blob/d0f5ef5/Packages/tweaks/elementary-tweaks.spec#L10
https://github.com/a-mere-peasant/elementary-tweaks-fedora/blob/d0f5ef5/Packages/tweaks/elementary-tweaks.spec#L24
6) The "Provides: elementary-tweaks = %{version}-%{release}" is redundant and
is automatically added by RPM. Remove the line.
https://github.com/a-mere-peasant/elementary-tweaks-fedora/blob/d0f5ef5/Packages/tweaks/elementary-tweaks.spec#L31
7) This looks like a spare space at the beginning of second line of the
description:
https://github.com/a-mere-peasant/elementary-tweaks-fedora/blob/d0f5ef5/Packages/tweaks/elementary-tweaks.spec#L36
8) Adjust the autosetup argument once you have a version-qualified source
tarball:
https://github.com/a-mere-peasant/elementary-tweaks-fedora/blob/d0f5ef5/Packages/tweaks/elementary-tweaks.spec#L39
9) %clean has not been used in fedora for ages and must not be used in .spec
files anymore. Remove the %clean section.
https://github.com/a-mere-peasant/elementary-tweaks-fedora/blob/d0f5ef5/Packages/tweaks/elementary-tweaks.spec#L50
10) You can't just own %{_libdir} and %{_datadir} as a whole. List only the
directories / files that are created by this package directly, and not common
filesystem paths (there are some exceptions to this rule, but none should apply
here).
https://github.com/a-mere-peasant/elementary-tweaks-fedora/blob/d0f5ef5/Packages/tweaks/elementary-tweaks.spec#L57
11) At the bottom, add a %changelog section. It's missing right now.
https://github.com/a-mere-peasant/elementary-tweaks-fedora/blob/d0f5ef5/Packages/tweaks/elementary-tweaks.spec#L58
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1798798] Review Request: ocaml-ppx-deriving - Type-driven code generation for OCaml
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1798798 --- Comment #3 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) --- Hi Jerry, Just managed to run it through FedoraReview now. The build seems to be failing in the check section. Could you please take a look? Executing(%check): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.ffMslv + umask 022 + cd /builddir/build/BUILD + cd ppx_deriving-4.4 + dune runtest File "src_test/deriving/test_ppx_deriving.ml", line 4, characters 25-35: 4 | let sort = List.sort [%derive.ord: int * int] in ^^ Error: Uninterpreted extension 'derive.ord'. File "src_test/create/test_deriving_create.ml", line 38, characters 24-32: 38 | assert_equal ~printer:M.show_a Error: Unbound value M.show_a File "test_deriving_eq.cppo.ml", line 24, characters 31-39: Error: Unbound value equal_a1 File "test_deriving_fold.cppo.ml", line 8, characters 41-51: Error: Unbound value fold_btree File "test_deriving_iter.cppo.ml", line 34, characters 2-12: Error: Unbound value iter_btree File "src_test/enum/test_deriving_enum.ml", line 7, characters 42-52: 7 | assert_equal ~printer:string_of_int 0 (va_to_enum Aa); ^^ Error: Unbound value va_to_enum File "src_test/make/test_deriving_make.ml", line 48, characters 24-32: 48 | assert_equal ~printer:M.show_a Error: Unbound value M.show_a File "test_deriving_map.cppo.ml", line 81, characters 15-24: Error: Unbound value map_btree File "test_deriving_ord.cppo.ml", line 22, characters 30-40: Error: Unbound value compare_a1 Hint: Did you mean compare? File "test_deriving_show.cppo.ml", line 23, characters 35-42: Error: Unbound value show_a1 RPM build errors: error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.ffMslv (%check) Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.ffMslv (%check) Child return code was: 1 EXCEPTION: [Error()] Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/mockbuild/trace_decorator.py", line 93, in trace Cheers, -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1803097] Review Request: mangohud - Vulkan overlay layer for monitoring FPS, temperatures, CPU/GPU load and more
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1803097 --- Comment #14 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/mangohud -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
