[Bug 1839475] Review Request: python-msal - Microsoft Authentication Library (MSAL) for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839475 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-26f856d019 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-26f856d019 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1839475] Review Request: python-msal - Microsoft Authentication Library (MSAL) for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839475 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-d2173c8004 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-d2173c8004 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1809405] Review Request: python-sumatra - Tool for managing and tracking projects based on numerical simulation and/or analysis, with the aim of supporting reproducible research
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1809405 Ntish changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(nisharma@redhat.c | |om) | --- Comment #16 from Ntish --- Hi Ankur, I will look into it over weekend, I will ping you when i start. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1834496] Review Request: python-colcon-coveragepy-result - Extension for colcon to collect coverage.py results
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1834496 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-a1b70feb8c has been pushed to the Fedora 32 stable repository. If problem still persists, 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 1841167] Review Request: rust-gitui - Blazing fast terminal-ui for git
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841167 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-05-29 04:09:27 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-d3770ba5a9 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 stable repository. If problem still persists, 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 1833741] Review Request: python-colcon-lcov-result - Extension for colcon to provide test results using LCOV
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1833741 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-078fd6a431 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 stable repository. If problem still persists, 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 1833745] Review Request: python-colcon-ed - Extension for colcon to edit a file within a package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1833745 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-84cf8d20b2 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 stable repository. If problem still persists, 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 810049] Review Request: netbeans-ide - Netbeans Integrated Development Environment (IDE)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810049 --- Comment #121 from leenaji --- (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #0) > Spec URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/netbeans.spec > SRPM URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/netbeans-7.1.1-1.fc16.src.rpm > Description: NetBeans IDE is an Integrated Development Environment (IDE) for > Java/JavaFX, > C/C++, Ruby, PHP, etc. The NetBeans IDE is oriented on wide audience of > developers from beginners up to experts. A developer can find useful set of > the development tools that are embedded in the IDE or can be integrated > with. > The NetBeans IDE is the modular system and it can be configured according to > user needs. Please, visit http://www.netbeans.org/ for more information > about > this open-source project. https://maalsell.com/blog/ https://easypractice.in/ https://udaipurmirror.com/ http://code-kit.com/ https://kartora.com/ Target page for Udaipur -https://udaipurcallgirlsandescort.com Target page for Jaipur - https://udaipurcallgirlsandescort.com/jaipur-escorts.html Target page for jaisalmer - https://udaipurcallgirlsandescort.com/jaisalmer-escorts.html Target page for jodhpur - https://udaipurcallgirlsandescort.com/jodhpur-escorts-service.html Target for mount Abu - https://udaipurcallgirlsandescort.com/mount-abu-escorts.html http://hotescortsudaipur.com(In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #5) > only for https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=826530 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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 1838027] Review Request: zuul - Trunk Gating System
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1838027 --- Comment #9 from Neal Gompa --- (In reply to Fabien Boucher from comment #6) > > -> This is more problematic because the upstream has pinned cherrypy and > cheroot to a known working version for them. > The referenced issue is about scaling > https://github.com/cherrypy/cheroot/issues/263 and the proposed patch is not > ready https://github.com/cherrypy/cheroot/pull/277. > > It seems the cheroot issue leads to connection resets under a quite heavy > load on the Zuul API (zuul-web). > The reproducer (that I've run) shows that on the current rawhide, cheroot > has that issue. > > What are the options here ? > - Bypass the pinning because it does not prevent the services to run ? > - Do a library bundle (for cheroot and cherrypy), is it authorized, feasible > ? > - Wait for the fix to land ? My suggestion would be to patch out the pinning and backport the fix to the cherrypy packages in Fedora. It's not actually *critical* for Zuul to function, and the patch would be useful for *all* users of CherryPy (including, for example, Ipsilon). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1839352] Review Request: python-pypet - Parameter exploration toolbox
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839352 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-668ef6991f has been pushed to the Fedora 31 testing repository. In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2020-668ef6991f \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-668ef6991f See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1829070] Review Request: multiwatch - Forks and watches multiple instances of a program in the same context
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1829070 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-EPEL-2020-cfef250ad5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 stable repository. If problem still persists, 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 1837793] Review Request: golang-github-xiaq-persistent - Persistent data structures for Go
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1837793 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-5518ca9f02 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 testing repository. In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2020-5518ca9f02 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-5518ca9f02 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1833475] Review Request: ocaml-ppx-compare - Generate comparison functions from types
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1833475 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-d4b6cff531 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 testing repository. In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2020-d4b6cff531 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-d4b6cff531 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1838686] Review Request: PDAL - Point Data Abstraction Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1838686 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #40 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-39bc8f5bab has been pushed to the Fedora 32 testing repository. In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2020-39bc8f5bab \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-39bc8f5bab See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1839352] Review Request: python-pypet - Parameter exploration toolbox
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839352 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-b4d6de6d8f has been pushed to the Fedora 32 testing repository. In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2020-b4d6de6d8f \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-b4d6de6d8f See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1834496] Review Request: python-colcon-coveragepy-result - Extension for colcon to collect coverage.py results
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1834496 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-05-29 02:26:34 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-0f3edb67c9 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 stable repository. If problem still persists, 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 1833741] Review Request: python-colcon-lcov-result - Extension for colcon to provide test results using LCOV
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1833741 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-05-29 02:26:36 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-4fc6b2fdea has been pushed to the Fedora 31 stable repository. If problem still persists, 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 1833745] Review Request: python-colcon-ed - Extension for colcon to edit a file within a package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1833745 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-05-29 02:26:35 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-b3d9acc24b has been pushed to the Fedora 31 stable repository. If problem still persists, 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 1829070] Review Request: multiwatch - Forks and watches multiple instances of a program in the same context
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1829070 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-EPEL-2020-7f7daa45d7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository. If problem still persists, 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 1833475] Review Request: ocaml-ppx-compare - Generate comparison functions from types
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1833475 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|MODIFIED --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-d4b6cff531 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-d4b6cff531 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1841336] Review Request: rust-khronos_api - The Khronos XML API Registry, exposed as byte string constants
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841336 Stefano Figura changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1839330 Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839330 [Bug 1839330] Review Request: rust-rustc_tools_util - Small helper to generate version information for git packages -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1841336] New: Review Request: rust-khronos_api - The Khronos XML API Registry, exposed as byte string constants
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841336 Bug ID: 1841336 Summary: Review Request: rust-khronos_api - The Khronos XML API Registry, exposed as byte string constants Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: stef...@figura.im QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://git.sr.ht/~returntrip/khronos_api/blob/master/rust-khronos_api.spec SRPM URL: https://git.sr.ht/~returntrip/khronos_api/blob/master/rust-khronos_api-3.1.0-1.fc33.src.rpm Koji Scratch Build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45115565 Description: The Khronos XML API Registry, exposed as byte string constants. Fedora Account System Username: returntrip -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1839330] Review Request: rust-rustc_tools_util - Small helper to generate version information for git packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839330 Stefano Figura changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1841336 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841336 [Bug 1841336] Review Request: rust-khronos_api - The Khronos XML API Registry, exposed as byte string constants -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1840914] Review Request: mpsolve - Multiprecision polynomial solver
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840914 --- Comment #6 from Jerry James --- See https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/8963 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1840914] Review Request: mpsolve - Multiprecision polynomial solver
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840914 --- Comment #5 from Jerry James --- Yes, you have. Okay, let's get the attention of somebody who can fix things for you. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org 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 1840914] Review Request: mpsolve - Multiprecision polynomial solver
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840914 --- Comment #4 from Jerry James --- Have you been sponsored into the packager group? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1840914] Review Request: mpsolve - Multiprecision polynomial solver
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840914 --- Comment #3 from Erich Eickmeyer --- > If you are going to sign on as the official reviewer here, then up top where > it says "Assignee", click on the "take" button. > Go to the right of that where it says "Flags", and click on "set flags", then > change the fedora-review flag to "?" to mark the > review as in progress. You will change that to "+" when you think the > package should be approved. At the bottom, find "Status" > and change it from "NEW" to "ASSIGNED". If you already knew all this, pardon > me for mansplaining. Yep, I knew all of this, but it simply won't let me. Not sure why. Bugzilla is... bugizlla. Other than that, I feel like you justified everything, but I don't feel qualified to approve this complex of a package. I guess since I've done most of the legwork, someone more qualified will have a ton less to do. :) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1839902] Review Request: rust-urlocator - Locate URLs in character streams
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839902 Stefano Figura changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: urlocator - |Review Request: |Locate URLs in character|rust-urlocator - Locate |streams |URLs in character streams 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 1809405] Review Request: python-sumatra - Tool for managing and tracking projects based on numerical simulation and/or analysis, with the aim of supporting reproducible research
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1809405 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(nisharma@redhat.c ||om) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1840224] Review Request: rust-expat-sys - XML parser library written in C
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840224 --- Comment #4 from Stefano Figura --- Apologies adding correct (new)links: Spec URL: https://git.sr.ht/~returntrip/rust-expat-sys/blob/master/rust-expat-sys.spec SRPM URL: https://git.sr.ht/~returntrip/rust-expat-sys/blob/master/rust-expat-sys-2.1.6-1.fc33.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 1840914] Review Request: mpsolve - Multiprecision polynomial solver
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840914
Jerry James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
--- Comment #2 from Jerry James ---
Thanks for the review, Erich.
(In reply to Erich Eickmeyer from comment #1)
> I have found the following (possible) issues:
>
> - mpsolve-libs.x86_64: E: library-not-linked-against-libc
> /usr/lib64/libmps-fortran.so.0.0.1
Yes, that's the fortran interface, and it doesn't need the C library. The
resulting shared object doesn't have any unresolved symbols, which is evidence
that it really doesn't need libc.
> * I'm not 100% sure if this is a false-positive, but it was found by RPM
> lint.
> - mpsolve.src: E: specfile-error warning: line 141: Possible unexpanded
> macro in: Requires: octave(api) = %{octave_api}
I'm not sure what to do about this. The octave_api macro is apparently not
defined when the source RPM is created. However, it is defined at build time.
After doing a Rawhide build, for example:
$ rpm -q --requires -p octave-mpsolve-3.1.8-1.fc33.x86_64.rpm
...
octave(api) = api-v53
...
So I don't think this is an actual problem.
> * Again, not 100% positive on this one here.
> - Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in mpsolve-
> libs , mpsolve-devel , xmpsolve , python3-mpsolve , octave-mpsolve
> * This is a spot where I'm not 100% confident in what's going on here.
> From what I can see, there are spots where this is happening?
This is kind of a complex package. It probably wasn't fair of me to ask you to
review it. There is a library (which is actually the only part I really need),
there are command line tools, a GUI, and interfaces to the library from octave
and python. All of these have to go into separate subpackages, to manage the
dependencies. When a package has both a library and one or more binaries
linked to that library, two forms of organization are common:
- Make the main package contain the library and a subpackage contain the
binaries. You might have a package named libfoo, for example, and the binaries
go into libfoo-tools.
- Make the main package contain the binaries and a subpackage contain the
library. You might have a package named foo, for example, and the library goes
into foo-libs.
I have chosen the second approach in this case, because the main package name
is also the name of one of the binaries, so I thought that would lead to less
confusion. This means that everything except mpsolve-libs (and mpsolve-doc)
has to depend on mpsolve-libs, rather than on mpsolve, the main package. Look
for "Requires: %{name}-libs%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}"; you'll find it in
the main package, and the devel xmpsolve, python3-mpsolve, and octave-mpsolve
subpackages. The mpsolve-doc package doesn't need any dependencies at all,
because it is just documentation.
If you are going to sign on as the official reviewer here, then up top where it
says "Assignee", click on the "take" button. Go to the right of that where it
says "Flags", and click on "set flags", then change the fedora-review flag to
"?" to mark the review as in progress. You will change that to "+" when you
think the package should be approved. At the bottom, find "Status" and change
it from "NEW" to "ASSIGNED". If you already knew all this, pardon me for
mansplaining.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1838686] Review Request: PDAL - Point Data Abstraction Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1838686 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|MODIFIED --- Comment #39 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-39bc8f5bab has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-39bc8f5bab -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1840224] Review Request: rust-expat-sys - XML parser library written in C
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840224 Stefano Figura changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(stef...@figura.im | |) | --- Comment #3 from Stefano Figura --- Applied changed as requested and updated the spec file found in the description. New koji build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45112839 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1839888] Review Request: python-pyvex - A Python interface to libVEX and the VEX intermediate representation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839888 --- Comment #2 from W. Michael Petullo --- Spec URL: https://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/python-pyvex.spec SRPM URL: https://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/python-pyvex-8.20.1.7-2.fc32.src.rpm Description: A Python interface to libVEX and the VEX intermediate representation Fedora Account System Username: mikep - Update BuildRequires - Fix build with version of make provided in Fedora 33 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1836540] Review Request: mudita24 - ALSA GUI control tool for Envy24 (ice1712) soundcards
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1836540 Jerry James changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #10 from Jerry James --- (In reply to Erich Eickmeyer from comment #9) > I'll bug them, but I can't make promises, especially if they haven't been > active in a while. Not the first time I've run into this address problem. Yes, that old address is still rampant in the open source world for some reason. You'd think 15 years would be long enough for people to notice. :-) Everything looks good now. This package is APPROVED. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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 1837793] Review Request: golang-github-xiaq-persistent - Persistent data structures for Go
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1837793 --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-5518ca9f02 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-5518ca9f02 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1840914] Review Request: mpsolve - Multiprecision polynomial solver
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840914
Erich Eickmeyer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||er...@ericheickmeyer.com
--- Comment #1 from Erich Eickmeyer ---
I have found the following (possible) issues:
- mpsolve-libs.x86_64: E: library-not-linked-against-libc
/usr/lib64/libmps-fortran.so.0.0.1
* I'm not 100% sure if this is a false-positive, but it was found by RPM
lint.
- mpsolve.src: E: specfile-error warning: line 141: Possible unexpanded macro
in: Requires: octave(api) = %{octave_api}
* Again, not 100% positive on this one here.
- Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in mpsolve-
libs , mpsolve-devel , xmpsolve , python3-mpsolve , octave-mpsolve
* This is a spot where I'm not 100% confident in what's going on here.
From what I can see, there are spots where this is happening?
Other than that, if these aren't actual issues, LGTM.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
Issues:
===
- Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop-
file-validate if there is such a file.
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
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", "FSF All Permissive License", "Expat
License", "GPL (v3 or later)", "FSF Unlimited License (with Retention)
GNU General Public License (v2)", "FSF Unlimited License (with
Retention)", "Mozilla Public License 1.1", "*No copyright* GNU General
Public License (v3)". 527 files have unknown license. Detailed output
of licensecheck in
/home/erich/Dev/~Reviewdir/mpsolve/1840914-mpsolve/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.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 3 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: 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
[Bug 1839887] Review Request: python-cle - A Python interface for analyzing binary formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839887
--- Comment #2 from W. Michael Petullo ---
Spec URL: https://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/python-cle.spec
SRPM URL: https://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/python-cle-8.20.1.7-2.fc32.src.rpm
Description:
CLE loads binaries and their associated libraries, resolves imports
and provides an abstraction of process memory the same way as if it was
loader by the OS's loader.
Fedora Account System Username: mikep
- Added link to merge request for patch
- Delete eggs in prep
- Make use of "%{pypi_source}"
The install failure is due to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839888. The package there needs to
be approved before this one will install.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1837798] Review Request: golang-github-elves-elvish - Elvish shell
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1837798 Bug 1837798 depends on bug 1837793, which changed state. Bug 1837793 Summary: Review Request: golang-github-xiaq-persistent - Persistent data structures for Go https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1837793 What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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 1837793] Review Request: golang-github-xiaq-persistent - Persistent data structures for Go
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1837793 Carson Black changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2020-05-28 19:31:21 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1841167] Review Request: rust-gitui - Blazing fast terminal-ui for git
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841167 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|MODIFIED --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-d3770ba5a9 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-d3770ba5a9 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1836540] Review Request: mudita24 - ALSA GUI control tool for Envy24 (ice1712) soundcards
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1836540 --- Comment #9 from Erich Eickmeyer --- Thanks, Jerry. :) > - The %doc macro puts README into /usr/share/doc/mudita24. The package's > install target puts README.profiles int /usr/share/doc/mudiat24-1.1.0. That > seems wrong. We should create a single doc directory for both files. > You've > got at least these alternatives (I haven't tried any of them, so they may > need some tweaking): > [snip] I went with option #3, looks like it worked. > pkg-config Made the changes. > - Upstream hasn't been active for awhile, but could you ask them to fix the > FSF's address? It's probably best if they just grab a new copy of COPYING > from https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.txt as a few other > minor things have changed in the last decade and a half or so. I'll bug them, but I can't make promises, especially if they haven't been active in a while. Not the first time I've run into this address problem. Also made the change to the changelog. New files: Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/eeickmeyer/Jam-Incoming/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01415759-mudita24/mudita24.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/eeickmeyer/Jam-Incoming/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01415759-mudita24/mudita24-1.1.0-1.20160218gite38b1a3.fc33.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 1826621] Review Request: rmd - Resource Manager Deamon
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1826621 --- Comment #23 from Igor Raits --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rmd -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1841164] Review Request: rust-asyncgit - Allow using git2 in a asynchronous context
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841164 Igor Raits changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2020-05-28 18:50:44 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1824156] Review Request: exfatprogs - Userspace utilities for exFAT filesystems
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1824156 Peter Lemenkov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vasc...@gmail.com --- Comment #29 from Peter Lemenkov --- *** Bug 822049 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 822049] Review Request: exfat-utils - Utilities for exFAT file system
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=822049 Peter Lemenkov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lemen...@gmail.com Resolution|WONTFIX |DUPLICATE --- Comment #4 from Peter Lemenkov --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1824156 *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1838027] Review Request: zuul - Trunk Gating System
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1838027 Miro Hrončok changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ssydo...@redhat.com Depends On||1742034 Flags||needinfo?(ssydoren@redhat.c ||om) --- Comment #8 from Miro Hrončok --- Sviatoslav, can you please help with the cheroot fix? Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1742034 [Bug 1742034] python-virtualenv-20.0.21 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 1839352] Review Request: python-pypet - Parameter exploration toolbox
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839352 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-b4d6de6d8f has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-b4d6de6d8f -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1839352] Review Request: python-pypet - Parameter exploration toolbox
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839352 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-b4d6de6d8f has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-b4d6de6d8f --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-668ef6991f has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-668ef6991f -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1841163] Review Request: rust-scopetime - Log runtime of arbitrary scope
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841163 Igor Raits changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2020-05-28 18:27:40 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1836540] Review Request: mudita24 - ALSA GUI control tool for Envy24 (ice1712) soundcards
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1836540
--- Comment #8 from Jerry James ---
All you can do is all I can ask.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
= ISSUES =
- Remove these lines at the top of the spec file:
#find-debuginfo.sh does not pick-up the debuginfo for whatever reason.
#when built, the .debug file shows in usr/lib/debug/usr/bin
%global debug_package %{nil}
They are wrong. The debuginfo is generated correctly.
- The %cmake macro already includes -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX:PATH=/usr in its
expansion, so you don't need to specify it again. All you need is "%cmake
.".
- The %doc macro puts README into /usr/share/doc/mudita24. The package's
install target puts README.profiles int /usr/share/doc/mudiat24-1.1.0. That
seems wrong. We should create a single doc directory for both files. You've
got at least these alternatives (I haven't tried any of them, so they may
need some tweaking):
o Pass -Dmudita24_DOC_DIR:PATH=%{_docdir}/%{name} to %cmake and change the
last %files entry to %{_docdir}/%{name}/README.profiles
o At the end of %install, do this:
mv %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/doc/mudita24-%{version}
%{buildroot}%{_datadir}/doc/mudita24
and make the same %files change as above
o At the end of %install, do this:
rm -rf %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/doc/mudita24-%{version}
And then in %files do this:
%doc README mudita24/README.profiles
and just remove the last line in %files
- The %changelog entry has a '-' in the version where it should have a '.';
it should be 1.1.0-1.20160218gite38b1a3 instead of
1.1.0-1-20160218gite38b1a3.
- Since this package uses pkg-config to find its dependencies, use the
"pkgconfig" form of dependency for the BuildRequires. In particular,
"BuildRequires: pkgconfig(alsa)" instead of alsa-lib-devel, and
"BuildRequires: pkgconfig(gtk+-2.0)" instead of gtk2-devel. See
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/PkgConfigBuildRequires/
- Upstream hasn't been active for awhile, but could you ask them to fix the
FSF's address? It's probably best if they just grab a new copy of COPYING
from https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.txt as a few other
minor things have changed in the last decade and a half or so.
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[!]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[!]: 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 20480 bytes in 2 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: 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
[Bug 1833475] Review Request: ocaml-ppx-compare - Generate comparison functions from types
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1833475 --- Comment #6 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ocaml-ppx-compare -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1841164] Review Request: rust-asyncgit - Allow using git2 in a asynchronous context
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841164 --- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-asyncgit -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1841167] Review Request: rust-gitui - Blazing fast terminal-ui for git
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841167 --- Comment #3 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-gitui -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1841163] Review Request: rust-scopetime - Log runtime of arbitrary scope
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841163 --- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-scopetime -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1836540] Review Request: mudita24 - ALSA GUI control tool for Envy24 (ice1712) soundcards
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1836540 --- Comment #7 from Erich Eickmeyer --- Hi Jerry, I'll see what I can do. :) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1841167] Review Request: rust-gitui - Blazing fast terminal-ui for git
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841167 Neal Gompa changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |POST CC||ngomp...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ngomp...@gmail.com Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Neal Gompa --- Package was generated through rust2rpm, simplifying the review considerably. - Conforms to packaging guidelines (rust2rpm generated spec) - license correct and valid - as this is a crate that provides an application, it installs binaries correctly - as this is a crate that provides no API, it does *not* install sources PACKAGE APPROVED. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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 1841164] Review Request: rust-asyncgit - Allow using git2 in a asynchronous context
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841164 Neal Gompa changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |POST CC||ngomp...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ngomp...@gmail.com Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Neal Gompa --- Package was generated through rust2rpm, simplifying the review considerably. - Conforms to packaging guidelines (rust2rpm generated spec) - license correct and valid - only sources installed PACKAGE APPROVED. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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 1841163] Review Request: rust-scopetime - Log runtime of arbitrary scope
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841163 Neal Gompa changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |POST CC||ngomp...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ngomp...@gmail.com Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Neal Gompa --- Package was generated through rust2rpm, simplifying the review considerably. - Conforms to packaging guidelines (rust2rpm generated spec) - license correct and valid - only sources installed PACKAGE APPROVED. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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 1833475] Review Request: ocaml-ppx-compare - Generate comparison functions from types
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1833475 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|POST Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) --- OK, that looks good! XXX APPROVED XXX -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1836540] Review Request: mudita24 - ALSA GUI control tool for Envy24 (ice1712) soundcards
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1836540 Jerry James changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||loganje...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|loganje...@gmail.com Flags|needinfo?(fed...@svgames.pl |fedora-review? |) | --- Comment #6 from Jerry James --- I can take this review. Erich, you offered to swap reviews on fedora-devel-list, with the caveat that you weren't sure of your ability. I think it would be good for you to do some reviews, to gain more familiarity with packaging guidelines. Could you attempt a review of bug 1840914? If it proves too much for you, that's okay. The fedora-review tool automates a lot of the steps, which should help. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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 1838027] Review Request: zuul - Trunk Gating System
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1838027 --- Comment #7 from Miro Hrončok --- > Wait for the fix to land ? Make the fix, backport it if needed? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1833475] Review Request: ocaml-ppx-compare - Generate comparison functions from types
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1833475 --- Comment #4 from Jerry James --- (In reply to Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) from comment #3) > [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. > ^ > Rather long list, but it looks OK. Please do double-check Looks okay to me. > [?]: Latest version is packaged. > ^ > Uh, upstream just released a new version 2 days ago. > https://github.com/janestreet/ppx_compare/releases Yes, but we can't use it yet. If you look at the ocaml-ppx* packages we currently have in Fedora, you'll note that several of them are at version 0.13. They share an upstream (Jane Street), and are released together. The 0.14 versions are out, but we'll have to update them all together. I haven't had time to do the mock builds yet to verify that nothing will break. So, for now, we need version 0.13 of this package; it will be updated to 0.14 when all the others are. > [?]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise > justified. > ^ > Should the patch be sent upstream? No, because another change to dune in the meantime made it unnecessary. I have dropped the patch. New URLs: Spec URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/ocaml-ppx-compare/ocaml-ppx-compare.spec SRPM URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/ocaml-ppx-compare/ocaml-ppx-compare-0.13.0-2.fc33.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 1839352] Review Request: python-pypet - Parameter exploration toolbox
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839352 --- Comment #5 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-pypet -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1839352] Review Request: python-pypet - Parameter exploration toolbox
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839352 Jerry James changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Jerry James --- Looks good. This package is APPROVED. You will probably want to build it into the python 3.9 side tag, or talk to Miro if that isn't feasible. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1826621] Review Request: rmd - Resource Manager Deamon
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1826621 Neil Horman changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: RMD - |Review Request: rmd - |Resource Manager Deamon |Resource Manager Deamon -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1838027] Review Request: zuul - Trunk Gating System
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1838027
--- Comment #6 from Fabien Boucher ---
Spec URL: https://fbo.fedorapeople.org/zuul/zuul.spec
SRPM URL: https://fbo.fedorapeople.org/zuul/zuul-3.19.0-1.fc33.src.rpm
3.19.0 has just been released. I'm using it.
Now I keep the requirements.txt and let the runtime deps to be discovered with
it.
But this actually makes the package installation not possible due to:
- nothing provides ((python3.8dist(virtualenv) < 20 or
python3.8dist(virtualenv) > 20) with (python3.8dist(virtualenv) < 20.0.1 or
python3.8dist(virtualenv) > 20.0.1) with python3.8dist(virtualenv) > 20) needed
by zuul-3.19.0-1.fc33.noarch
-> This should be fixed soon when
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-virtualenv/pull-request/20 merge.
- nothing provides python3.8dist(cheroot) < 8.1 needed by
zuul-3.19.0-1.fc33.noarch
- nothing provides python3.8dist(cherrypy) = 18.3 needed by
zuul-3.19.0-1.fc33.noarch
-> This is more problematic because the upstream has pinned cherrypy and
cheroot to a known working version for them.
The referenced issue is about scaling
https://github.com/cherrypy/cheroot/issues/263 and the proposed patch is not
ready https://github.com/cherrypy/cheroot/pull/277.
It seems the cheroot issue leads to connection resets under a quite heavy load
on the Zuul API (zuul-web).
The reproducer (that I've run) shows that on the current rawhide, cheroot has
that issue.
What are the options here ?
- Bypass the pinning because it does not prevent the services to run ?
- Do a library bundle (for cheroot and cherrypy), is it authorized, feasible ?
- Wait for the fix to land ?
Also regarding the others points you reported:
- pathfix.py use %{python3}: done
- zuul-webui has no dependency on zuul: yes we only distribute the UI source,
that will need to build by the operator with npm (will be explained in the
readme)
- LICENSE should be marked as %license: done and added LICENSE to all
subpackages
- rpmlint I've added a zuul.rpmlintrc
https://fbo.fedorapeople.org/zuul/zuul.rpmlintrc with my explanations
Thanks in advance for your help
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
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 1838686] Review Request: PDAL - Point Data Abstraction Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1838686 --- Comment #38 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/PDAL -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1838686] Review Request: PDAL - Point Data Abstraction Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1838686 --- Comment #37 from markusN --- Thanks for all your guidance! https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/25323 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1841167] Review Request: rust-gitui - Blazing fast terminal-ui for git
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841167 --- Comment #1 from Igor Raits --- New Spec URL: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/rust-gitui.spec New SRPM URL: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/rust-gitui-0.4.0-1.fc33.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 1841167] New: Review Request: rust-gitui - Blazing fast terminal-ui for git
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841167 Bug ID: 1841167 Summary: Review Request: rust-gitui - Blazing fast terminal-ui for git Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: igor.ra...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/rust-gitui.spec SRPM URL: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/rust-gitui-0.4.0-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: Blazing fast terminal-ui for git. Fedora Account System Username: ignatenkobrain -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1841164] New: Review Request: rust-asyncgit - Allow using git2 in a asynchronous context
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841164 Bug ID: 1841164 Summary: Review Request: rust-asyncgit - Allow using git2 in a asynchronous context Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: igor.ra...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/rust-asyncgit.spec SRPM URL: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/rust-asyncgit-0.4.0-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: Allow using git2 in a asynchronous context. Fedora Account System Username: ignatenkobrain -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1841163] New: Review Request: rust-scopetime - Log runtime of arbitrary scope
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1841163 Bug ID: 1841163 Summary: Review Request: rust-scopetime - Log runtime of arbitrary scope Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: igor.ra...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/rust-scopetime.spec SRPM URL: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/rust-scopetime-0.1.1-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: Log runtime of arbitrary scope. Fedora Account System Username: ignatenkobrain -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1838686] Review Request: PDAL - Point Data Abstraction Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1838686 Sandro Mani changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|POST --- Comment #36 from Sandro Mani --- LGTM, feel free to proceed to request the repo & 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 1839330] Review Request: rust-rustc_tools_util - Small helper to generate version information for git packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839330 --- Comment #5 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-rustc_tools_util -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1833379] Review Request: python-jaraco-text - Module for text manipulation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1833379
--- Comment #2 from Fabien Boucher ---
Here is a fedora-review output. Mainly I noticed the package does not install
due to missing dependencies.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- Package installs properly.
Note: Installation errors (see below)
See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/
- I see 3 runtime dependencies here:
https://github.com/jaraco/jaraco.text/blob/b5b209d119b2eef39a325ff92118726895ca2e0d/setup.cfg#L23
but the spec file lists at least 10. Is all of them really necessary ?
- Is this one a blocker ?
[!]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/lib/python3.8/site-
packages/jaraco(python3-jaraco-classes, python3-jaraco),
/usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/jaraco/__pycache__(python3-jaraco-
classes, python3-jaraco)
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Unknown or generated", "Expat License". 26 files have unknown
license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/fabien/git/src.fedoraproject.org/1833379-python-jaraco-
text/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[!]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/lib/python3.8/site-
packages/jaraco(python3-jaraco-classes, python3-jaraco),
/usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/jaraco/__pycache__(python3-jaraco-
classes, python3-jaraco)
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[-]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package 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
Python:
[ ]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
process.
[ ]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Packages MUST NOT have dependencies (either build-time or runtime) on
packages named with the unversioned python- prefix unless no properly
[Bug 1840224] Review Request: rust-expat-sys - XML parser library written in C
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840224
--- Comment #2 from Stefano Figura ---
(In reply to Michel Alexandre Salim from comment #1)
> Could you file an issue against upstream for the broken symlink for
> README.md too, and add the link to the spec? I suspect it used to share a
> git repo with another project and someone forgot to update the README after
> the split.
>
> Also -- `rm -vr expat` is commented out so you're not stripping out the
> bundled expat. If I uncomment it, build fails:
>
> ```
> --- stdout
> running: "cmake" "/builddir/build/BUILD/expat-sys-2.1.6/expat"
> "-DBUILD_shared=OFF" "-DBUILD_tools=OFF" "-DBUILD_examples=OFF"
> "-DBUILD_tests=OFF"
> "-DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=/builddir/build/BUILD/expat-sys-2.1.6/target/release/
> build/expat-sys-23aa5946dcba096c/out" "-DCMAKE_C_FLAGS= -ffunction-sections
> -fdata-sections -fPIC -m64" "-DCMAKE_C_COMPILER=/usr/bin/cc"
> "-DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS= -ffunction-sections -fdata-sections -fPIC -m64"
> "-DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER=/usr/bin/c++" "-DCMAKE_ASM_FLAGS= -ffunction-sections
> -fdata-sections -fPIC -m64" "-DCMAKE_ASM_COMPILER=/usr/bin/cc"
> "-DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release"
>
> --- stderr
> CMake Error: The source directory
> "/builddir/build/BUILD/expat-sys-2.1.6/expat" does not exist.
> Specify --help for usage, or press the help button on the CMake GUI.
> thread 'main' panicked at '
> command did not execute successfully, got: exit code: 1
>
> ```
>
> I encountered this too with bzip2-sys; even if upstream supports looking up
> the system library via pkgconfig, it will not find it if you don't add this
> as a BuildRequires.
>
> Add this below the existing BuildRequires on rust-packaging:
>
> BuildRequires: pkgconfig(expat)
>
>
> This should allow the build to succeed against the system expat instead of
> the bundled one.
Thanks for the review! Will fix the README.md issue.
One confusing thing about `rm -vr expat`. I see that both spec on sr.ht and on
my machine do not even it commented out. Am I missing something?
```
%prep
%autosetup -n %{crate}-%{version_no_tilde} -p1
rm -vr expat
%cargo_prep
```
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1840870] Review Request: golang-github-HarryMichal-go-version - Version normalizer and comparison library for Go
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840870 Fabian Affolter changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||m...@fabian-affolter.ch Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|m...@fabian-affolter.ch Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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 1839887] Review Request: python-cle - A Python interface for analyzing binary formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839887
Fabian Affolter changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|m...@fabian-affolter.ch
Flags||fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Fabian Affolter ---
The installation issue can be ignored for now as python-pyvex is not available
at the moment.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- Package installs properly.
Note: Installation errors (see attachment)
See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/
- The URL in "Source0:" could be replaced with "%{pypi_source}".
- Any possible available egg should be deleted in %prep.
- Link to upstream for patch is missing
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "BSD 2-clause "Simplified" License", "Unknown or generated". 83
files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/fab/Documents/repos/reviews/1839887-python-cle/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: 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
Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[!]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Packages MUST NOT have dependencies (either build-time or runtime) on
packages named with the unversioned python- prefix unless no properly
versioned package exists. Dependencies on Python packages instead MUST
use names beginning with python2- or python3- as appropriate.
[x]: Python packages must not contain %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files
[!]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
[Bug 1839887] Review Request: python-cle - A Python interface for analyzing binary formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839887 Fabian Affolter changed: What|Removed |Added CC||m...@fabian-affolter.ch Depends On||1839888 Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839888 [Bug 1839888] Review Request: python-pyvex - A Python interface to libVEX and the VEX intermediate representation -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1839888] Review Request: python-pyvex - A Python interface to libVEX and the VEX intermediate representation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839888 Fabian Affolter changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1839887 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839887 [Bug 1839887] Review Request: python-cle - A Python interface for analyzing binary formats -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1840865] Review Request: lv2lint - LV2 turtle language checker
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840865 --- Comment #24 from Vasiliy Glazov --- Yes, inform me. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1836319] Review Request: hanyang-gothic-a1-fonts - Elegant Korean and Latin font family
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1836319 --- Comment #12 from Artur Iwicki --- FYI, I've reported the ttname/repo-font-audit issues for fedora-review: ttname is dead: https://pagure.io/FedoraReview/issue/390 repo-font-audit is unavailable: https://pagure.io/FedoraReview/issue/391 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1833475] Review Request: ocaml-ppx-compare - Generate comparison functions from types
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1833475
--- Comment #3 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) ---
Looks good. No blockers but a few tiny issues that need double-checking.
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++/
^
False positive.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
^
Rather long list, but it looks OK. Please do double-check
[?]: Latest version is packaged.
^
Uh, upstream just released a new version 2 days ago.
https://github.com/janestreet/ppx_compare/releases
[?]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
justified.
^
Should the patch be sent upstream?
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[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", "Expat License". 20 files have unknown
license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/asinha/dump/fedora-
reviews/1833475-ocaml-ppx-compare/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.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
^
Rather long list, but it looks OK. Please do double-check
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[?]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 133120 bytes in 25 files.
^
Up to you really, it's all in the -devel sub-package so I think it's OK.
[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
Ocaml:
[x]: This should never happen
= 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
[Bug 1840865] Review Request: lv2lint - LV2 turtle language checker
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840865 --- Comment #23 from ycollet --- OK. I will certainly try to do a mix: submitting some new spec files and try to do some review. When I do a review, I add you to the review ? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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 1839888] Review Request: python-pyvex - A Python interface to libVEX and the VEX intermediate representation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839888
--- Comment #1 from Fabian Affolter ---
The build requirements are needing an adjustment.
[...]
raise DistutilsError(msg)
distutils.errors.DistutilsError: Could not find suitable distribution for
Requirement.parse('cffi>=1.0.3')
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.mLi3Wv (%build)
Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.mLi3Wv (%build)
RPM build errors:
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
result = func(*args, **kw)
File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/mockbuild/util.py", line 776, in
do_with_status
raise exception.Error("Command failed: \n # %s\n%s" % (command, output),
child.returncode)
mockbuild.exception.Error: Command failed:
[...]
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC 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 1840865] Review Request: lv2lint - LV2 turtle language checker
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840865 --- Comment #22 from Vasiliy Glazov --- Because your spec was not good at start I need to make sure you understand most significant rules of Fedora packaging guidellines. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/ First variant - you can make few reviews for other packages in bugzilla. Second variant - as I understand you want to add more packages from your copr. So you can make 2-4 new review requests for it with good specs at start (not ideally, I anderstand that you beginner, but without big mistakes). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1840865] Review Request: lv2lint - LV2 turtle language checker
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840865 --- Comment #21 from ycollet --- I finished reading the wiki page related to sponsoring. What can I do so as you sponsor me ? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1839352] Review Request: python-pypet - Parameter exploration toolbox
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839352 --- Comment #3 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) --- Thanks Jerry! I've added the missing BRs required for the docs now: Spec URL: https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/python-pypet/python-pypet.spec SRPM URL: https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/python-pypet/python-pypet-0.4.3-1.fc32.src.rpm * Thu May 28 2020 Ankur Sinha - 0.4.3-1 - Add missing BRs for docs 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 1827939] Review Request: ardour6 - Digital Audio Workstation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1827939
Guido Aulisi changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|guido.aul...@gmail.com
--- Comment #8 from Guido Aulisi ---
> # Delete zero length file (probably needed to keep empty dir in GIT)
> rm %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/%{name}/templates/.stub
> # Delete wscript file (merged upstream
> https://github.com/Ardour/ardour/pull/516)
> rm "%{buildroot}%{_datadir}/%{name}/plugin_metadata/wscript"
These have to be moved before %find_lang, rpm looks for them:
RPM build errors:
File not found:
/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/ardour6-6.0.0-2.fc33.x86_64/usr/share/ardour6/templates/.stub
File not found:
/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/ardour6-6.0.0-2.fc33.x86_64/usr/share/ardour6/plugin_metadata/wscript
Sorry, that was my mistake.
Pull request for wscript has been merged
Package seems good to me now, I will post the last review log asap and approve
it when you fix the above error.
If you want to build for f32 too, we should upgrade fluidsynth2 on f32 and
rebuild the dependant packages. ardour5 has already been patched for f33, it
could be patched on f32 too.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
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 1825456] Review Request: libvirt-test-API - Python based regression tests for libvirt API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1825456 --- Comment #1 from lnie --- Hi, I have rebuilt the package and here are the new links: Spec URL:https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/lnie/libvirt-test-API/fedora-32-x86_64/01415309-libvirt-test-api/libvirt-test-api.spec SRPM URL:https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/lnie/libvirt-test-API/fedora-32-x86_64/01415309-libvirt-test-api/libvirt-test-api-1.0-1.fc32.src.rpm Koji:https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45092907 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1838686] Review Request: PDAL - Point Data Abstraction Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1838686 --- Comment #35 from markusN --- I have dropped those lines and uploaded the final (?) SPEC file again. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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 1838686] Review Request: PDAL - Point Data Abstraction Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1838686 markusN changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment|0 |1 #1692850 is|| obsolete|| --- Comment #34 from markusN --- Created attachment 1692936 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1692936=edit PDAL.spec -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC 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
