[Bug 1853555] Review Request: ghc-HsOpenSSL - Partial OpenSSL binding for Haskell
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1853555 --- Comment #2 from Jens Petersen --- Thank you for the review https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/26827 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1836986] Review Request: aron - Tool to find hidden GET & POST parameters
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1836986 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-d46e5f0f08 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 1837139] Review Request: python-py-gql - Comprehensive GraphQL implementation for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1837139 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-6bd09ee715 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 1839456] Review Request: R-filelock - Portable File Locking
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839456 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-1c73657410 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 1839474] Review Request: R-DBItest - Testing DBI Backends
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839474 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-07-05 02:09:49 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-8f8f90ddc7 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 1830933] Review Request: python-masscan - Python module to interact with masscan
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1830933 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-d695e9ec0a 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 1836565] Review Request: python-aiogqlc - GraphQL client with file upload support
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1836565 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-e08ca538ca 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 1836925] Review Request: goddi - Dumper for Active Directory domain information
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1836925 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-0dc9eb342e 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 1836689] Review Request: python-typedecorator - Decorator-based type checking library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1836689 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-32e22e2c99 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 1840314] Review Request: ldeep - LDAP enumeration utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840314 Bug 1840314 depends on bug 1840310, which changed state. Bug 1840310 Summary: Review Request: python-commandparse - CLI application commands parser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840310 What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1837046] Review Request: python-aiomultiprocess - Asyncio version of the standard multiprocessing module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1837046 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-13d988c946 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 1836968] Review Request: sipvicious - Set of tools to audit SIP based VoIP systems
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1836968 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-11925d273a 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 1839451] Review Request: R-servr - Simple HTTP Server to Serve Static Files or Dynamic Documents
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839451 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-44b4d441e6 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 1840310] Review Request: python-commandparse - CLI application commands parser
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840310 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-07-05 02:09:45 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-573fbc8fe1 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 1830267] Review Request: python-nanoid - Unique string ID generator for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1830267 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-59b7ccb419 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 1825139] Review Request: python-pymata-express - Python Protocol Abstraction Library For Arduino Firmata
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1825139 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-84e3f45f0e 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 1830273] Review Request: golang-github-matoous-nanoid - Go implementation of ai's nanoid
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1830273 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-edf961c5a8 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 1834959] Review Request: python-textwrap3 - Text wrap backport
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1834959 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|RAWHIDE |ERRATA --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-e5c6a2370f 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 1836568] Review Request: python-graphql-relay - Relay library for graphql-core-next
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1836568 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-c675c7cbca 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 1837046] Review Request: python-aiomultiprocess - Asyncio version of the standard multiprocessing module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1837046 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-07-05 01:48:31 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-1563d5c787 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 1830273] Review Request: golang-github-matoous-nanoid - Go implementation of ai's nanoid
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1830273 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-07-05 01:48:39 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-fc272f4d76 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 1836968] Review Request: sipvicious - Set of tools to audit SIP based VoIP systems
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1836968 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-07-05 01:48:19 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-f154fad5dd 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 1839456] Review Request: R-filelock - Portable File Locking
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839456 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-07-05 01:48:57 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-5b066a7d79 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 1836986] Review Request: aron - Tool to find hidden GET & POST parameters
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1836986 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-07-05 01:48:33 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-f0dbff08b8 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 1837139] Review Request: python-py-gql - Comprehensive GraphQL implementation for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1837139 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-07-05 01:48:25 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-d4f9543fec 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 1836925] Review Request: goddi - Dumper for Active Directory domain information
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1836925 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-07-05 01:48:35 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-cb96e99cbf 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 1836689] Review Request: python-typedecorator - Decorator-based type checking library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1836689 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-07-05 01:48:21 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-de0a29d210 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 1825139] Review Request: python-pymata-express - Python Protocol Abstraction Library For Arduino Firmata
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1825139 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-07-05 01:48:23 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-b007a45cf4 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 1836565] Review Request: python-aiogqlc - GraphQL client with file upload support
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1836565 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-07-05 01:48:37 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-cacfa1e6d4 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 1836568] Review Request: python-graphql-relay - Relay library for graphql-core-next
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1836568 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|RAWHIDE |ERRATA --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-e9658e0782 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 1830933] Review Request: python-masscan - Python module to interact with masscan
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1830933 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-07-05 01:48:29 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-be2cc0f977 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 1839451] Review Request: R-servr - Simple HTTP Server to Serve Static Files or Dynamic Documents
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1839451 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-07-05 01:48:55 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-7e84926900 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 1830267] Review Request: python-nanoid - Unique string ID generator for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1830267 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-07-05 01:48:27 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-8eea07b4c0 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 1851405] Review Request: bee2 - cryptographic library which implements cryptographic algorithm and protocols standardized in Belarus
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1851405
--- Comment #12 from Кощеев ---
> %if 0%{?fedora} || 0%{?rhel} > 7
It doesn't work that way:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/kashcheyeu/bee2/epel-8-x86_64/01517970-bee2/builder-live.log
Spec URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/kashcheyeu/bee2/fedora-32-x86_64/01517971-bee2/bee2.spec
SRPM URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/kashcheyeu/bee2/srpm-builds/01517971/bee2-2.0.5-6.20200702git2d8ccce.fc32.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 1853858] New: Review Request: badwolf - Web Browser which aims at security and privacy over usability
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1853858 Bug ID: 1853858 Summary: Review Request: badwolf - Web Browser which aims at security and privacy over usability Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: fed...@lyes.eu QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://lyessaadi.fedorapeople.org/badwolf/badwolf.spec SRPM URL: https://lyessaadi.fedorapeople.org/badwolf/badwolf-1.0.0-1.fc32.src.rpm Copr Build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/lyessaadi/badwolf/build/1517959/ Koji Build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=46590960 Description: BadWolf is a minimalist and privacy-oriented WebKitGTK+ browser. - Privacy-oriented: No browser-level tracking, multiple ephemeral isolated sessions per new unrelated tabs, JavaScript off by default. - Minimalist: Small codebase (~1 500 LoC), reuses existing components when available or makes it available. - Customizable: WebKitGTK native extensions, Interface customizable through CSS. - Powerful & Usable: Stable User-Interface; The common shortcuts are available (and documented), no vi-modal edition or single-key shortcuts are used. - No annoyances: Dialogs are only used when required (save file, print, …), javascript popups open in a background tab. Fedora Account System Username: lyessaadi PS: I am aware that I forgot to add the version in the changelog. I fixed it locally, but I don't think that rebuilding the package in koji and copr only for that would be appropriate. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1853780] Review Request: new-session-manager - Music production session manager
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1853780 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |POST Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com Flags|needinfo?(zebo...@gmail.com |fedora-review+ |) | --- Comment #3 from Robert-André Mauchin --- - You forgot that part " and add a comment explaining the license breakdown." # Main porgram: GPL2+ # nsm.h: ISC. License:GPLv3+ and ISC Package is approved, please fix the aforementioned issue before 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 1853087] Review Request: rust-libcryptsetup-rs-sys - low level Rust bindings for libcryptsetup
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1853087 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #9 from Robert-André Mauchin --- Package approved. You still need to seek a sponsor: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_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 1853780] Review Request: new-session-manager - Music production session manager
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1853780
Erich Eickmeyer changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||needinfo?(zebo...@gmail.com
||)
--- Comment #2 from Erich Eickmeyer ---
> - Please validate the desktop file in %install or %check
> See
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_desktop_file_install_usage
>
> desktop-file-validate
> %{_datadir}/applications/org.linuxaudio.nsm-legacy-gui.desktop
Done, except you forgot the %{buildroot} part. :)
> - It seems %{_bindir}/nsmd is included twice in the %files list
Oops, fixed.
> - Upstream mentions:
>
> "All files, except nsm.h kept in this fork were GPL "version 2 of the
> License, or (at your option) any later version."
>
> nsm.h is licensed under the ISC."
>
>
> Add ISC to the license field, and add a comment explaining the license
> breakdown.
Missed that part. Done.
> - Shouldn't you provide SystemD unit file for the server part?
No. The server part is not meant to run independently of the application, at
least not yet afaik.
New files as follows:
Spec URL:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/eeickmeyer/Jam-Incoming/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01517739-new-session-manager/new-session-manager.spec
SRPM URL:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/eeickmeyer/Jam-Incoming/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01517739-new-session-manager/new-session-manager-1.3.2-1.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 1853829] Review Request: python-jose - JOSE implementation in Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1853829 --- Comment #2 from c...@redhat.com --- Hi Robert-André, thanks for review. The SPEC file is updated. PTAL. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1853087] Review Request: rust-libcryptsetup-rs-sys - low level Rust bindings for libcryptsetup
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1853087 --- Comment #8 from John Baublitz --- Passing koji build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=46573145 Source RPM: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/jbaublitz/rust-libcryptsetup-rs-sys/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01517705-rust-libcryptsetup-rs-sys/rust-libcryptsetup-rs-sys-0.1.4-1.fc33.src.rpm Spec file: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/jbaublitz/rust-libcryptsetup-rs-sys/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01517705-rust-libcryptsetup-rs-sys/rust-libcryptsetup-rs-sys.spec This is ready for review again. Thanks! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1853829] Review Request: python-jose - JOSE implementation in Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1853829
Robert-André Mauchin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |POST
CC||zebo...@gmail.com
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
- This is not needed for a noarch package:
%global debug_package %{nil}
-
Source0:
https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/p/%{pypi_name}/%{pypi_name}-%{version}.tar.gz
→
Source0:%{pypi_source %pypi_name}
- Use https:
URL:https://github.com/mpdavis/python-jose
Package approved. Please fix the aforementioned issue before import.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Expat License", "Unknown or generated". 100 files have unknown
license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/bob/packaging/review/python-jose/review-python-
jose/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]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package 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 use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: 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
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query
[Bug 1802370] Review Request: golang-github-francoispqt-gojay - Fastest JSON encoder/decoder with powerful stream API for Golang
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1802370 Olivier Lemasle changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ |needinfo?(o.lemasle@gmail.c | |om) | --- Comment #10 from Olivier Lemasle --- Thanks, package approved. - MIT license ok - Spec + changelog format ok - Naming guidelines + packaging guidelines ok - Builds in mock ok - Documentation ok Rpmlint --- Checking: golang-github-francoispqt-gojay-1.2.13-1.fc33.x86_64.rpm golang-github-francoispqt-gojay-devel-1.2.13-1.fc33.noarch.rpm golang-github-francoispqt-gojay-debuginfo-1.2.13-1.fc33.x86_64.rpm golang-github-francoispqt-gojay-debugsource-1.2.13-1.fc33.x86_64.rpm golang-github-francoispqt-gojay-1.2.13-1.fc33.src.rpm golang-github-francoispqt-gojay.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US performant -> perform ant, perform-ant, performance golang-github-francoispqt-gojay.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gojay golang-github-francoispqt-gojay-devel.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US performant -> perform ant, perform-ant, performance golang-github-francoispqt-gojay-devel.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/francoispqt/gojay/.goipath golang-github-francoispqt-gojay.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US performant -> perform ant, perform-ant, performance 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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 1853829] New: Review Request: python-jose - JOSE implementation in Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1853829 Bug ID: 1853829 Summary: Review Request: python-jose - JOSE implementation in Python Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: c...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/cqi/python-jose/fedora-32-x86_64/01517685-python-jose/python-jose.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/cqi/python-jose/fedora-32-x86_64/01517685-python-jose/python-jose-3.1.0-1.fc32.src.rpm Description: A JOSE implementation in Python The JavaScript Object Signing and Encryption (JOSE) technologies - JSON Web Signature (JWS), JSON Web Encryption (JWE), JSON Web Key (JWK), and JSON Web Algorithms (JWA) - collectively can be used to encrypt and/or sign content using a variety of algorithms. While the full set of permutations is extremely large, and might be daunting to some, it is expected that most applications will only use a small set of algorithms to meet their needs. Fedora Account System Username: cqi -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1851405] Review Request: bee2 - cryptographic library which implements cryptographic algorithm and protocols standardized in Belarus
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1851405 --- Comment #11 from Robert-André Mauchin --- (In reply to Björn 'besser82' Esser from comment #9) > (In reply to Robert-André Mauchin from comment #8) > > The rest looks good. > > The package still MUST use %make_build BEFORE running %make_install… > > In %check it MUST use %make_build instead of %make_install. Ha yes I missed that part. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1853674] Review Request: perl-Module-Load-Util - Some utility routines related to module loading
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1853674 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |POST CC||zebo...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin --- URL and Source addresses are Ok. Source archive (SHA-256: 47a0e7c2ddbb70f4803de0a09a54f001de2e07a2c90e8feaa8536cafe7968e1a) is original. Ok. Summary verified from lib/Module/Load/Util.pm. Ok. Description verified. Ok. License verified from README and lib/Module/Load/Util.pm. Ok. No XS code, noarch BuildArch is Ok. Pod::Coverage::TrustPod, Test::Pod::Coverage, Test::Perl::Critic, and Test::Pod are not used. Ok. AUTHOR_TESTING variable is unset before executing "make test". Ok. $ rpmlint perl-Module-Load-Util.spec review-perl-Module-Load-Util/results/perl-Module-Load-Util-0.003-1.fc33.noarch.rpm review-perl-Module-Load-Util/results/perl-Module-Load-Util-0.003-1.fc33.src.rpm 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. rpm -q -lv -p review-perl-Module-Load-Util/results/perl-Module-Load-Util-0.003-1.fc33.noarch.rpm 13:21:42 drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Jul 4 13:19 /usr/share/doc/perl-Module-Load-Util -rw-r--r--1 root root 542 Jun 16 07:17 /usr/share/doc/perl-Module-Load-Util/Changes -rw-r--r--1 root root 6068 Jun 16 07:17 /usr/share/doc/perl-Module-Load-Util/README drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Jul 4 13:19 /usr/share/licenses/perl-Module-Load-Util -rw-r--r--1 root root18367 Jun 16 07:17 /usr/share/licenses/perl-Module-Load-Util/LICENSE -rw-r--r--1 root root 3104 Jul 4 13:19 /usr/share/man/man3/Module::Load::Util.3pm.gz drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Jul 4 13:19 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Module drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Jul 4 13:19 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Module/Load -rw-r--r--1 root root 8958 Jun 16 07:17 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Module/Load/Util.pm File layout ans permissions are Ok. $ rpm -q --requires -p review-perl-Module-Load-Util/results/perl-Module-Load-Util-0.003-1.fc33.noarch.rpm | sort -f | uniq -c 1 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.32.0) 1 perl(Exporter) >= 5.57 1 perl(Regexp::Pattern::Perl::Module) 1 perl(strict) 1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadIsZstd) <= 5.4.18-1 Binary requires are Ok. $ rpm -q --provides -p review-perl-Module-Load-Util/results/perl-Module-Load-Util-0.003-1.fc33.noarch.rpm | sort -f | uniq -c 1 perl(Module::Load::Util) = 0.003 1 perl-Module-Load-Util = 0.003-1.fc33 Binary provides are Ok. The package builds in Fedora 33 (Mock). Ok. The package is in line with Fedora and Perl packagaging guidelines. Resolution: Package approved. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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 1853669] Review Request: perl-Regexp-Pattern-Perl - Regexp patterns related to Perl
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1853669 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |POST CC||zebo...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin --- URL and Source addresses are Ok. Source archive (SHA-256: 7db8cfdd4d69671facd6238d15099df48bf41db1a8323d2582e02e649fc6df67) is original. Ok. Summary verified from lib/Regexp/Pattern/Perl/Module.pm. Ok. Description verified. Ok. License verified from README and lib/Regexp/Pattern/Perl/Module.pm. Ok. No XS code, noarch BuildArch is Ok. Pod::Coverage::TrustPod, Test::Pod::Coverage, Test::Perl::Critic, and Test::Pod are not used. Ok. AUTHOR_TESTING variable is unset before executing "make test". Ok. $ rpmlint perl-Regexp-Pattern-Perl.spec review-perl-Regexp-Pattern-Perl/results/perl-Regexp-Pattern-Perl-0.002-1.fc33.noarch.rpm review-perl-Regexp-Pattern-Perl/results/perl-Regexp-Pattern-Perl-0.002-1.fc33.src.rpm 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpm -q -lv -p review-perl-Regexp-Pattern-Perl/results/perl-Regexp-Pattern-Perl-0.002-1.fc33.noarch.rpm 13:09:45 drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Jul 4 13:08 /usr/share/doc/perl-Regexp-Pattern-Perl -rw-r--r--1 root root 221 Jun 16 07:19 /usr/share/doc/perl-Regexp-Pattern-Perl/Changes -rw-r--r--1 root root 1258 Jun 16 07:19 /usr/share/doc/perl-Regexp-Pattern-Perl/README drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Jul 4 13:08 /usr/share/licenses/perl-Regexp-Pattern-Perl -rw-r--r--1 root root18367 Jun 16 07:19 /usr/share/licenses/perl-Regexp-Pattern-Perl/LICENSE -rw-r--r--1 root root 1725 Jul 4 13:08 /usr/share/man/man3/Regexp::Pattern::Perl.3pm.gz -rw-r--r--1 root root 2029 Jul 4 13:08 /usr/share/man/man3/Regexp::Pattern::Perl::Module.3pm.gz drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Jul 4 13:08 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Regexp drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Jul 4 13:08 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Regexp/Pattern drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Jul 4 13:08 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Regexp/Pattern/Perl -rw-r--r--1 root root 1567 Jun 16 07:19 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Regexp/Pattern/Perl.pm -rw-r--r--1 root root 4119 Jun 16 07:19 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Regexp/Pattern/Perl/Module.pm File layout ans permissions are Ok. $ rpm -q --requires -p review-perl-Regexp-Pattern-Perl/results/perl-Regexp-Pattern-Perl-0.002-1.fc33.noarch.rpm | sort -f | uniq -c 1 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.32.0) 1 perl(strict) 1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadIsZstd) <= 5.4.18-1 Binary requires are Ok. $ rpm -q --provides -p review-perl-Regexp-Pattern-Perl/results/perl-Regexp-Pattern-Perl-0.002-1.fc33.noarch.rpm | sort -f | uniq -c 1 perl(Regexp::Pattern::Perl) = 0.002 1 perl(Regexp::Pattern::Perl::Module) = 0.002 1 perl-Regexp-Pattern-Perl = 0.002-1.fc33 Binary provides are Ok. The package builds in Fedora 33 (https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=46566062). Ok. The package is in line with Fedora and Perl packagaging guidelines. Resolution: Package approved. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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 1853650] Review Request: perl-Graphics-ColorNamesLite-WWW - WWW color names and equivalent RGB values
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1853650 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |POST CC||zebo...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin --- URL and Source addresses are Ok. Source archive (SHA-256: 0b85aa04277a986086970a9e5f7b968c784262bbcb4a2bd9ea0792f892276f33) is original. Ok. Summary verified from lib/Graphics/ColorNamesLite/WWW.pm. Ok. Description verified. Ok. License verified from README and lib/Graphics/ColorNamesLite/WWW.pm. Ok. No XS code, noarch BuildArch is Ok. Pod::Coverage::TrustPod, Test::Pod::Coverage, Test::Perl::Critic, and Test::Pod are not used. Ok. AUTHOR_TESTING variable is unset before executing "make test". Ok. $ rpmlint perl-Graphics-ColorNamesLite-WWW.spec review-perl-Graphics-ColorNamesLite-WWW/results/perl-Graphics-ColorNamesLite-WWW-1.14.000-1.fc33.noarch.rpm review-perl-Graphics-ColorNamesLite-WWW/results/perl-Graphics-ColorNamesLite-WWW-1.14.000-1.fc33.src.rpm 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpm -q -lv -p review-perl-Graphics-ColorNamesLite-WWW/results/perl-Graphics-ColorNamesLite-WWW-1.14.000-1.fc33.noarch.rpm drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Jul 4 12:55 /usr/share/doc/perl-Graphics-ColorNamesLite-WWW -rw-r--r--1 root root 73 Jun 10 11:42 /usr/share/doc/perl-Graphics-ColorNamesLite-WWW/Changes -rw-r--r--1 root root 1130 Jun 10 11:42 /usr/share/doc/perl-Graphics-ColorNamesLite-WWW/README drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Jul 4 12:55 /usr/share/licenses/perl-Graphics-ColorNamesLite-WWW -rw-r--r--1 root root18367 Jun 10 11:42 /usr/share/licenses/perl-Graphics-ColorNamesLite-WWW/LICENSE -rw-r--r--1 root root 1661 Jul 4 12:55 /usr/share/man/man3/Graphics::ColorNamesLite::WWW.3pm.gz drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Jul 4 12:55 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Graphics drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Jul 4 12:55 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Graphics/ColorNamesLite -rw-r--r--1 root root 6775 Jun 10 11:42 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Graphics/ColorNamesLite/WWW.pm File layout ans permissions are Ok. $ rpm -q --requires -p review-perl-Graphics-ColorNamesLite-WWW/results/perl-Graphics-ColorNamesLite-WWW-1.14.000-1.fc33.noarch.rpm | sort -f | uniq -c 1 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.32.0) 1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadIsZstd) <= 5.4.18-1 Binary requires are Ok. $ rpm -q --provides -p review-perl-Graphics-ColorNamesLite-WWW/results/perl-Graphics-ColorNamesLite-WWW-1.14.000-1.fc33.noarch.rpm | sort -f | uniq -c 1 perl(Graphics::ColorNamesLite::WWW) = 1.14.000 1 perl-Graphics-ColorNamesLite-WWW = 1.14.000-1.fc33 Binary provides are Ok. The package builds in Fedora 33 (https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=46565701). Ok. The package is in line with Fedora and Perl packagaging guidelines. Resolution: Package approved. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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 1851205] Review Request: AusweisApp2 - Online identification with German ID card (Personalausweis)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1851205 --- Comment #11 from Björn 'besser82' Esser --- === Updated package === Changelog: * Sat Jul 04 2020 Björn Esser - 1.20.1-0.10 - Add license text in English language Urls: Spec URL: https://pagure.io/besser82/package-review/raw/master/f/AusweisApp2.spec SRPM URL: https://pagure.io/besser82/package-review/raw/master/f/AusweisApp2-1.20.1-0.10.fc33.src.rpm Scratch build: Rawhide: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=46565229 EPEL8:https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=46565243 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1853644] Review Request: perl-ColorThemeBase-Static - Base class for color theme modules with static list of items
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1853644 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |POST CC||zebo...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin --- URL and Source addresses are Ok. Source archive (SHA-256: b9c473290bf4915847b264030e68e06e8ed100f98e80f8bf9619b1b1a6bafb31) is original. Ok. Summary verified from lib/ColorThemeBase/Base.pm. Ok. Description verified. Ok. License verified from README and lib/ColorThemeBase/Base.pm. Ok. No XS code, noarch BuildArch is Ok. Pod::Coverage::TrustPod, Test::Pod::Coverage, Test::Perl::Critic, and Test::Pod are not used. Ok. AUTHOR_TESTING variable is unset before executing "make test". Ok. $ rpmlint perl-ColorThemeBase-Static.spec review-perl-ColorThemeBase-Static/results/perl-ColorThemeBase-Static-0.008-1.fc33.noarch.rpm review-perl-ColorThemeBase-Static/results/perl-ColorThemeBase-Static-0.008-1.fc33.src.rpm 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpm -q -lv -p review-perl-ColorThemeBase-Static/results/perl-ColorThemeBase-Static-0.008-1.fc33.noarch.rpm 12:47:44 drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Jul 4 12:45 /usr/share/doc/perl-ColorThemeBase-Static -rw-r--r--1 root root 1229 Jun 19 17:57 /usr/share/doc/perl-ColorThemeBase-Static/Changes -rw-r--r--1 root root 1255 Jun 19 17:57 /usr/share/doc/perl-ColorThemeBase-Static/README drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Jul 4 12:45 /usr/share/licenses/perl-ColorThemeBase-Static -rw-r--r--1 root root18367 Jun 19 17:57 /usr/share/licenses/perl-ColorThemeBase-Static/LICENSE -rw-r--r--1 root root 1612 Jul 4 12:45 /usr/share/man/man3/ColorTheme::Test::Dynamic.3pm.gz -rw-r--r--1 root root 1608 Jul 4 12:45 /usr/share/man/man3/ColorTheme::Test::Static.3pm.gz -rw-r--r--1 root root 1638 Jul 4 12:45 /usr/share/man/man3/ColorThemeBase::Base.3pm.gz -rw-r--r--1 root root 1625 Jul 4 12:45 /usr/share/man/man3/ColorThemeBase::Constructor.3pm.gz -rw-r--r--1 root root 1713 Jul 4 12:45 /usr/share/man/man3/ColorThemeBase::Static.3pm.gz -rw-r--r--1 root root 1850 Jul 4 12:45 /usr/share/man/man3/ColorThemeBase::Static::FromObjectColors.3pm.gz -rw-r--r--1 root root 1790 Jul 4 12:45 /usr/share/man/man3/ColorThemeBase::Static::FromStructColors.3pm.gz drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Jul 4 12:45 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/ColorTheme drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Jul 4 12:45 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/ColorTheme/Test -rw-r--r--1 root root 2197 Jun 19 17:57 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/ColorTheme/Test/Dynamic.pm -rw-r--r--1 root root 1783 Jun 19 17:57 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/ColorTheme/Test/Static.pm drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Jul 4 12:45 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/ColorThemeBase -rw-r--r--1 root root 1701 Jun 19 17:57 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/ColorThemeBase/Base.pm -rw-r--r--1 root root 2567 Jun 19 17:57 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/ColorThemeBase/Constructor.pm drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Jul 4 12:45 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/ColorThemeBase/Static -rw-r--r--1 root root 1671 Jun 19 17:57 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/ColorThemeBase/Static.pm -rw-r--r--1 root root 2547 Jun 19 17:57 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/ColorThemeBase/Static/FromObjectColors.pm -rw-r--r--1 root root 2496 Jun 19 17:57 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/ColorThemeBase/Static/FromStructColors.pm File layout ans permissions are Ok. $ rpm -q --requires -p review-perl-ColorThemeBase-Static/results/perl-ColorThemeBase-Static-0.008-1.fc33.noarch.rpm | sort -f | uniq -c 1 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.32.0) 1 perl(Color::RGB::Util) >= 0.600 1 perl(ColorThemeBase::Base) 1 perl(ColorThemeBase::Constructor) 1 perl(ColorThemeBase::Static::FromStructColors) 1 perl(Exporter) >= 5.57 1 perl(parent) 1 perl(strict) 1 perl(warnings) 1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadIsZstd) <= 5.4.18-1 I can't find the need for perl(Exporter) anywhere in the code, are you sure it is needed? $ rpm -q --provides -p
[Bug 1853634] Review Request: perl-Color-ANSI-Util - Routines for dealing with ANSI colors
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1853634 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |POST CC||zebo...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin --- URL and Source addresses are Ok. Source archive (SHA-256: 681c1c88d0d06e635d981482db855d2b8803b9a31e8de54e18912e76d1fdd062) is original. Ok. Summary verified from lib/Color/ANSI/Util.pm. Ok. Description verified. Ok. License verified from README and lib/Color/ANSI/Util.pm. Ok. No XS code, noarch BuildArch is Ok. Pod::Coverage::TrustPod, Test::Pod::Coverage, Test::Perl::Critic, and Test::Pod are not used. Ok. AUTHOR_TESTING variable is unset before executing "make test". Ok. $ rpmlint perl-Color-ANSI-Util.spec review-perl-Color-ANSI-Util/results/perl-Color-ANSI-Util-0.164-1.fc33.noarch.rpm review-perl-Color-ANSI-Util/results/perl-Color-ANSI-Util-0.164-1.fc33.src.rpm perl-Color-ANSI-Util.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ansifg -> ANSI perl-Color-ANSI-Util.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ansibg -> ANSI perl-Color-ANSI-Util.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ansifg -> ANSI perl-Color-ANSI-Util.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ansibg -> ANSI 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. $ rpm -q -lv -p review-perl-Color-ANSI-Util/results/perl-Color-ANSI-Util-0.164-1.fc33.noarch.rpm 12:37:20 drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Jul 4 12:34 /usr/share/doc/perl-Color-ANSI-Util -rw-r--r--1 root root 3200 Jun 9 11:01 /usr/share/doc/perl-Color-ANSI-Util/Changes -rw-r--r--1 root root 8293 Jun 9 11:01 /usr/share/doc/perl-Color-ANSI-Util/README drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Jul 4 12:34 /usr/share/licenses/perl-Color-ANSI-Util -rw-r--r--1 root root18493 Jun 9 11:01 /usr/share/licenses/perl-Color-ANSI-Util/LICENSE -rw-r--r--1 root root 3408 Jul 4 12:34 /usr/share/man/man3/Color::ANSI::Util.3pm.gz drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Jul 4 12:34 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Color drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Jul 4 12:34 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Color/ANSI -rw-r--r--1 root root24365 Jun 9 11:01 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Color/ANSI/Util.pm File layout and permissions are Ok. $ rpm -q --requires -p review-perl-Color-ANSI-Util/results/perl-Color-ANSI-Util-0.164-1.fc33.noarch.rpm | sort -f | uniq perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.32.0) perl(:VERSION) >= 5.10.1 perl(Color::RGB::Util) >= 0.600 perl(Exporter) >= 5.57 perl(strict) perl(warnings) rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadIsZstd) <= 5.4.18-1 Binary requires are Ok. $ rpm -q --provides -p review-perl-Color-ANSI-Util/results/perl-Color-ANSI-Util-0.164-1.fc33.noarch.rpm | sort -f | uniq -c 1 perl(Color::ANSI::Util) = 0.164 1 perl-Color-ANSI-Util = 0.164-1.fc33 Binary provides are Ok. The package builds in Fedora 33 (Mock). Ok. The package is in line with Fedora and Perl packagaging guidelines. Resolution: Package approved. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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 1853629] Review Request: perl-Color-RGB-Util - Utilities related to RGB colors
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1853629 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |POST CC||zebo...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin --- URL and Source addresses are Ok. Source archive (SHA-256: 4ff8ef2433c2e3fe2cf3730ca41b28617d8e80a860ddedba7e8cdbe17dd5972d) is original. Ok. Summary verified from lib/Color/RGB/Util.pm. Ok. Description verified. Ok. License verified from README and lib/Color/RGB/Util.pm. Ok. No XS code, noarch BuildArch is Ok. Pod::Coverage::TrustPod, Test::Pod::Coverage, Test::Perl::Critic, and Test::Pod are not used. Ok. AUTHOR_TESTING variable is unset before executing "make test". Ok. # Failed test 'Color/RGB/Util.pm loaded ok' # at t/00-compile.t line 43. # got: '512' # expected: '0' Can't locate blib.pm in @INC (you may need to install the blib module) (@INC contains: /builddir/build/BUILD/Color-RGB-Util-0.601/blib/lib /builddir/build/BUILD/Color-RGB-Util-0.601/blib/arch /usr/local/lib64/perl5/5.32 /usr/local/share/perl5/5.32 /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl /usr/lib64/perl5 /usr/share/perl5 .). BEGIN failed--compilation aborted. ⇒ blib.pm is not provided by perl-interpreter anymore but by perl-blib BuildRequires: perl(blib) $ rpmlint perl-Color-RGB-Util.spec review-perl-Color-RGB-Util/results/perl-Color-RGB-Util-0.601-1.fc33.noarch.rpm review-perl-Color-RGB-Util/results/perl-Color-RGB-Util-0.601-1.fc33.src.rpm 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpm -q -lv -p review-perl-Color-RGB-Util/results/perl-Color-RGB-Util-0.601-1.fc33.noarch.rpm 12:25:30 drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Jul 4 12:24 /usr/share/doc/perl-Color-RGB-Util -rw-r--r--1 root root 2109 Jun 8 07:14 /usr/share/doc/perl-Color-RGB-Util/Changes -rw-r--r--1 root root10721 Jun 8 07:14 /usr/share/doc/perl-Color-RGB-Util/README drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Jul 4 12:24 /usr/share/licenses/perl-Color-RGB-Util -rw-r--r--1 root root18457 Jun 8 07:14 /usr/share/licenses/perl-Color-RGB-Util/LICENSE -rw-r--r--1 root root 4861 Jul 4 12:24 /usr/share/man/man3/Color::RGB::Util.3pm.gz drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Jul 4 12:24 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Color drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Jul 4 12:24 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Color/RGB -rw-r--r--1 root root23426 Jun 8 07:14 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Color/RGB/Util.pm File layout ans permissions are Ok. $ rpm -q --requires -p review-perl-Color-RGB-Util/results/perl-Color-RGB-Util-0.601-1.fc33.noarch.rpm | sort -f | uniq -c 1 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.32.0) 1 perl(:VERSION) >= 5.10.1 1 perl(Digest::SHA) 1 perl(Exporter) >= 5.57 1 perl(strict) 1 perl(warnings) 1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadIsZstd) <= 5.4.18-1 Binary requires are Ok. $ rpm -q --provides -p review-perl-Color-RGB-Util/results/perl-Color-RGB-Util-0.601-1.fc33.noarch.rpm | sort -f | uniq -c 1 perl(Color::RGB::Util) = 0.601 1 perl-Color-RGB-Util = 0.601-1.fc33 Binary provides are Ok. The package builds in Fedora 33 (https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=46564409). Ok. The package is in line with Fedora and Perl packagaging guidelines. Resolution: Package approved. Please add the blib dependency before 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 1842662] Review Request: ismrmrd - ISMRM Raw Data Format (ISMRMRD)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1842662 Antonio T. sagitter changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||182235 (FE-Legal) --- Comment #4 from Antonio T. sagitter --- SPEC: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/sagitter/ForTesting/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01517626-ismrmrd/ismrmrd.spec SRPM: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/sagitter/ForTesting/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01517626-ismrmrd/ismrmrd-1.4.2.1-2.fc33.src.rpm (In reply to Fabian Affolter from comment #1) > - The license seems to be "ISMRMRD SOFTWARE LICENSE JULY 2013" according > LICENSE. Should be a MIT license. Good for Fedora. > One file contains a MPL header [1]. Can you please check this? > > - Link to upstream source of the *-make.patch is missing. > > Otherwise looks good to me. > > [1] > https://github.com/ismrmrd/ismrmrd/blob/ > 87b6f6b68fd53702f4f36d1a277ed4b9c865cd26/cmake/FindPugiXML.cmake > That's a CMake file, not a source file neither a file needed in runtime. Listing its license is not necessary. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=182235 [Bug 182235] Fedora Legal Tracker -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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 1851405] Review Request: bee2 - cryptographic library which implements cryptographic algorithm and protocols standardized in Belarus
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1851405 --- Comment #10 from Björn 'besser82' Esser --- besides that the libraries MUST be shipped in a seperate libs package to resolve conflicts with multi-arch. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1851405] Review Request: bee2 - cryptographic library which implements cryptographic algorithm and protocols standardized in Belarus
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1851405 --- Comment #9 from Björn 'besser82' Esser --- (In reply to Robert-André Mauchin from comment #8) > The rest looks good. The package still MUST use %make_build BEFORE running %make_install… In %check it MUST use %make_build instead of %make_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 1853617] Review Request: rtklib - Program Package for GNSS Positioning
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1853617
--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
%packagedoc
Summary:RTKLIB manual
Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
%descriptiondoc
Manual for RTKLIB tools.
- The doc subpackage should be noarch and no isa needed then
-
Source0:
https://github.com/tomojitakasu/RTKLIB/tarball/%{gitcommit_full}
→
Source0:
https://github.com/tomojitakasu/RTKLIB/archive/%{gitcommit_full}/%{name}-%{gitcommit}.tar.gz
- This is not clear how you generated the patch:
# https://github.com/JensReimann/RTKLIB/tree/rtklib_2.4.3
# ceb8106d53afa44cad6c45ae7873ba85ca458dc5
Patch0: rtklib-qt.patch
The commit you mention is totally different from the content of the patch. If
possible get the patch from a pull request or commit URL.
- setup should be quiet:
%setup -q
- keep timestamps with "install -p"
- I would split the library from the binaries by creating a libs subpackage
containing %{_libdir}/libRTKLib.so.1*. Devel should thus Requires:
%{name}-libs%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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 1853558] Review Request: rust-bytelines - Read input as byte lines
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1853558 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |POST CC||zebo...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin --- - You should ask upstream for a LICENSE file: Put the bug report URL as a comment until the matter is resolved. - License ok - Latest version packaged - Builds in mock - No rpmlint errors - Conforms to Packaging Guidelines Package approved. Please fix the LICENSE issue before 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 1853555] Review Request: ghc-HsOpenSSL - Partial OpenSSL binding for Haskell
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1853555 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |POST CC||zebo...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin --- - You've added: # DSA test failing for Fedora # https://github.com/vshabanov/HsOpenSSL/issues/49 %bcond_with tests but you're not using it in the %check part of the SPEC. The test seems to work. Package approved. Package Review == Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed = MUST items = C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see attachment). Verify they are not in ld path. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* Creative Commons CC0 Universal 1.0 Public Domain Dedication". 55 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/ghc-HsOpenSSL/review-ghc- HsOpenSSL/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/share/doc/ghc(ghc-Agda- doc, ghc-aeson-better-errors-doc, ghc-bitarray-doc, ghc-js-jquery-doc, ghc-EdisonCore-doc, ghc-filepattern-doc, ghc-compiler, ghc-time- manager-doc, ghc-EdisonAPI-doc, ghc-lukko-doc, ghc-cborg-doc, ghc- http2-doc, ghc-geniplate-mirror-doc, ghc-cborg-json-doc, ghc-murmur- hash-doc, ghc-parsers-doc, ghc-dns-doc, ghc-serialise-doc, ghc-uri- encode-doc, ghc-HsYAML-doc, ghc-unicode-transforms-doc, ghc-js-flot- doc), /usr/share/doc/ghc/html(ghc-Agda-doc, ghc-aeson-better-errors- doc, ghc-bitarray-doc, ghc-js-jquery-doc, ghc-EdisonCore-doc, ghc- filepattern-doc, ghc-compiler, ghc-time-manager-doc, ghc-EdisonAPI- doc, ghc-lukko-doc, ghc-cborg-doc, ghc-http2-doc, ghc-geniplate- mirror-doc, ghc-cborg-json-doc, ghc-murmur-hash-doc, ghc-parsers-doc, ghc-dns-doc, ghc-serialise-doc, ghc-uri-encode-doc, ghc-HsYAML-doc, ghc-unicode-transforms-doc, ghc-js-flot-doc), /usr/share/doc/ghc/html/libraries(ghc-Agda-doc, ghc-aeson-better- errors-doc, ghc-bitarray-doc, ghc-js-jquery-doc, ghc-EdisonCore-doc, ghc-filepattern-doc, ghc-compiler, ghc-time-manager-doc, ghc- EdisonAPI-doc, ghc-lukko-doc, ghc-cborg-doc, ghc-http2-doc, ghc- geniplate-mirror-doc, ghc-cborg-json-doc, ghc-murmur-hash-doc, ghc- parsers-doc, ghc-dns-doc, ghc-serialise-doc, ghc-uri-encode-doc, ghc- HsYAML-doc, ghc-unicode-transforms-doc, ghc-js-flot-doc) [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [-]: 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 51200 bytes in 10 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
[Bug 1853510] Review Request: flask-wtf-decorators
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1853510 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||zebo...@gmail.com --- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin --- Indeed it should be python-flask-wtf-decorators with a python3-flask-wtf-decorators subpackage. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1853780] Review Request: new-session-manager - Music production session manager
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1853780
Robert-André Mauchin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zebo...@gmail.com
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
- Please validate the desktop file in %install or %check
See
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_desktop_file_install_usage
desktop-file-validate
%{_datadir}/applications/org.linuxaudio.nsm-legacy-gui.desktop
- It seems %{_bindir}/nsmd is included twice in the %files list
- Upstream mentions:
"All files, except nsm.h kept in this fork were GPL "version 2 of the License,
or (at your option) any later version."
nsm.h is licensed under the ISC."
Add ISC to the license field, and add a comment explaining the license
breakdown.
- Shouldn't you provide SystemD unit file for the server part?
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop-
file-validate if there is such a file.
- Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
Note: warning: File listed twice: /usr/bin/nsmd
See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
guidelines/#_duplicate_files
= 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]: 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.
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* ISC License GPL (v3)",
"GPL (v3 or later)", "ISC License". 5 files have unknown license.
Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/new-
session-manager/review-new-session-manager/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.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[-]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[?]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 2 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package 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]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
[Bug 1812961] Review Request: openosc - Open Object Size Checking Library to detect buffer overflows with built-in metrics
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1812961 --- Comment #33 from Mattia Verga --- (In reply to Robert-André Mauchin from comment #32) > (In reply to Mattia Verga from comment #29) > > Actually, I can't find any user neither in the Packager group or in the > > Signed CLA Group with the email address of "zebo...@gmail.com"... > > My FAS is "eclipseo" > > yonhan didn't sign the CLA nor is sponsored: > > 10:37:58 zodbot | User: yonhan, Name: Yongkui Han, email: > yon...@cisco.com, Creation: 2020-03-11, IRC Nick: None, Timezone: UTC, > Locale: C, GPG key ID: None, Status: active > 10:38:01 zodbot | Approved Groups: None So, I suppose the error message returned by fedora-scm-request is misleading and is in fact due to the submitter not being approved 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 1851405] Review Request: bee2 - cryptographic library which implements cryptographic algorithm and protocols standardized in Belarus
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1851405
--- Comment #8 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
- The make_install test, if this is supposed to run test, make it run in
%check
%install
%if 0%{?fedora}
%make_install -C %{_vpath_builddir}
%else
%make_install
%endif
%{__rm} -rf %{buildroot}%{_libdir}/libbee2_static.a
%check
%make_install -C %{_vpath_builddir} test
%else
%make_install test
%endif
- Also consider EPEL8 for the condition on CMake:
%if 0%{?fedora} || 0%{?rhel} > 7
The rest looks good.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this 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 1812961] Review Request: openosc - Open Object Size Checking Library to detect buffer overflows with built-in metrics
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1812961 Robert-André Mauchin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|ASSIGNED --- Comment #32 from Robert-André Mauchin --- (In reply to Mattia Verga from comment #29) > Actually, I can't find any user neither in the Packager group or in the > Signed CLA Group with the email address of "zebo...@gmail.com"... My FAS is "eclipseo" yonhan didn't sign the CLA nor is sponsored: 10:37:58 zodbot | User: yonhan, Name: Yongkui Han, email: yon...@cisco.com, Creation: 2020-03-11, IRC Nick: None, Timezone: UTC, Locale: C, GPG key ID: None, Status: active 10:38:01 zodbot | Approved Groups: None -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1853172] Review Request: ghc-js-flot - Obtain minified flot code
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1853172 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|MODIFIED Fixed In Version||ghc-js-flot-0.8.3-1.fc33 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1812961] Review Request: openosc - Open Object Size Checking Library to detect buffer overflows with built-in metrics
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1812961 Mattia Verga changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(zebo...@gmail.com | |) | --- Comment #31 from Mattia Verga --- Sorry, my fault, it seems that fas search doesn't work with email addresses, only usernames... I thought it worked in the past. So, Robert André IS in packager group with the same email of BZ. Yonhan, have you been sponsored in the packager group and have you signed the CLA? I've opened a ticket on fedora infra to check what's wrong: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9110 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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 1851463] Review Request: python-django-uuslug - A Django slugify application that guarantees uniqueness and handles unicode
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1851463 --- Comment #6 from c...@redhat.com --- Hi Vasiliy, I searched from the Internet, and tried several ways to fix python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime, but still got these errors. Any hint of how to fix it? Thanks. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1812961] Review Request: openosc - Open Object Size Checking Library to detect buffer overflows with built-in metrics
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1812961 --- Comment #30 from Mattia Verga --- ...also, yon...@cisco.com has not been sponsored in the packager group and is not in the signed CLA 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 1812961] Review Request: openosc - Open Object Size Checking Library to detect buffer overflows with built-in metrics
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1812961 Mattia Verga changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(zebo...@gmail.com ||) --- Comment #29 from Mattia Verga --- Actually, I can't find any user neither in the Packager group or in the Signed CLA Group with the email address of "zebo...@gmail.com"... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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 1853145] Review Request: ghc-unicode-transforms - Unicode normalization
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1853145 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|MODIFIED Fixed In Version||ghc-unicode-transforms-0.3. ||6-1.fc33 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this 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
