https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #113 from Gwyn Ciesla ---
(fedrepo-req-admin): The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gnome-shell-extension-system-monitor-applet
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #112 from James Hogarth ---
No problems - any issues please ping me :)
Don't forget to close this review once you've built and pushed it to rawhide.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #111 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Sorry James.
I thought it was necessary to synchronize the file versions between the review
request and the first import in the Fedora-SCM. My bad!
Best Regards,
--
NVieville
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #110 from James Hogarth ---
I've already approved it... That's what the + in the flag means.
No need to do updates here anymore of the spec or srpm.
Just follow the steps in the link I provided to have
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #109 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello,
Here is the new version of the Spec file and the SRPM file modified according
to James advises, and hosted on github. Hope these URLs work with
fedora-review.
Rawhide Spec
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #108 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
(In reply to James Hogarth from comment #107)
Hello James,
First, thank you very much for your review and for sponsoring me for this
package. Glad to join the Fedora community.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
James Hogarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
James Hogarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |
Referenced
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
James Hogarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(james.hogarth@gma |
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #106 from James Hogarth ---
The reviews are fine overall - you don't need to worry about files without a
license in them so long as the source from upstream includes a specific license
already just
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #105 from James Hogarth ---
Hi,
Apologies for the delays on this ... time just goes by too fast.
Thanks for the links on the reviews.
FYI the dropbox URLs don't work with fedora-review (it doesn't pick
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #104 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello Community,
Last upgrade from last upstream release (fixed a bug in battery module).
New SPEC, SRPMS files and noarch RPMS packages for testing are provided (F-25,
F-26,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #103 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello Community,
Last upgrade from last upstream release (added Gnome 3.26 compatibility, added
GPU usage for NVidia and updated translations).
New SPEC, SRPMS files and noarch
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
Jeff Peeler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jpee...@redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #101 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello Community,
Last upgrade from last upstream release (improvements in translations,
especially for French).
New SPEC, SRPMS files and noarch RPMS packages for testing are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(nicolas.vieville@ |
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #99 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello James,
Thanks for your interest in this review request and your proposal to give the
formal review and to sponsor me.
I've noted that I have to issue a couple of informal
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
James Hogarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
James Hogarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #97 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello Community,
Last upgrade from last upstream release (improvements and gnome-shell 3.24
compatibility).
New SPEC, SRPMS files and noarch RPMS packages for testing are provided
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #96 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello Community,
Last upgrade from last upstream release.
New SPEC, SRPMS files and noarch RPMS packages for testing are provided (F-24,
F-25, F-26 and Rawhide - see below
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||177841
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #94 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello Community,
Last upgrade from last upstream release.
New SPEC, SRPMS files and noarch RPMS packages for testing are provided (F-24,
F-25 and Rawhide - see below explanations
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #93 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello Community,
As F-25 landed on my laptop here is the last packages for this gnome-shell
extension for F-25 and Rawhide. As nothing new from upstream has been pushed,
git commit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #92 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello Steven,
Thank you very much for your answer, and like Marcin and what I've already said
in this review, I understand completely your dilemma with your schedules. FOSS
for
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #91 from Marcin Zajaczkowski ---
Sure, I understand. Thanks for a quick response.
Good luck with finding your work-life balance!
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
Steven Dake changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
Marcin Zajaczkowski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #89 from Marcin Zajaczkowski ---
I would be good to have it directly in Fedora. Steven, will you have some time
to do the review?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #88 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello Community,
Last upgrade from last upstream release (added support for gnome 3.20).
New SPEC, SRPMS files and noarch RPMS packages for testing are provided (F-22,
F-23,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #87 from Upstream Release Monitoring
---
pbrobinson's scratch build of
gnome-dvb-daemon?#451a118009234eac9e3f06f465b00cf93478a5d5 for
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #86 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello Community,
Last upgrade from last upstream release (added support for gnome 3.18).
Thanks to Jens Lody the spec file has been reworked to fit his advices.
Thank you Jens.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #84 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
(In reply to Pablo Rodríguez from comment #83)
> Hi guys,
>
> I hope you have enjoyed your vacations.
Yes thanks. As my responsiveness on this review request has been largely
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
Jens Lody changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fed...@jenslody.de
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #83 from Pablo Rodríguez fed...@pragmata.tk ---
Hi guys,
I hope you have enjoyed your vacations.
Sorry for asking, but are there any news on this package?
Many thanks for your help,
Pablo
--
You are receiving this mail
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #82 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello Community,
Last upgrade from last upstream release (added support for gnome 3.16).
New SPEC, SRPMS files and noarch RPMS packages for testing are provided (F-20,
F-21,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #80 from Steven Dake steven.d...@gmail.com ---
Nicolas,
I will add you to the sponsor group and review this package hopefully today but
definitely this week. There may be a delay, as I'm not sure if i still have
the appropriate
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
Steven Dake steven.d...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||steven.d...@gmail.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
Steven Dake steven.d...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #81 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Steven,
Thank you for patience. As I have already noted in this review, delay is not a
problem for me ;)
Thank you for all you did in this review.
Regards,
--
NVieville
--
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
Perry Myers pmy...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|pmy...@redhat.com |nob...@fedoraproject.org
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #79 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Sorry, wrong URL for the Rawhide SRPM URL and wrong rpmlint message in the
previous message, here are the right ones:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #78 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello,
Last upgrade from last upstream release.
New SPEC, SRPMS files and noarch RPMS packages for testing are provided (F-20,
F-21 and Rawhide - see above to know how to compose
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
John Skeoch jske...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|sd...@redhat.com|pmy...@redhat.com
--
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #75 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello,
Last upgrade from last upstream release. New SPEC, SRPMS files and noarch RPMS
packages for testing are provided (F-20, F-21 and Rawhide - see above to know
how to compose
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #76 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello,
Last upgrade from last upstream release with bug fix in menu.
New SPEC, SRPMS files and noarch RPMS packages for testing are provided (F-20,
F-21 and Rawhide - see above
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #74 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
(In reply to Jeff Peeler from comment #73)
Sorry about the silence here.
Delay is not a problem for me.
Your package reviews seem good and I think you've learned a little more
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #73 from Jeff Peeler jpee...@redhat.com ---
Sorry about the silence here. Your package reviews seem good and I think you've
learned a little more about what the expectations are for Fedora in doing them.
This bug properly has
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #70 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello,
New unofficial review began for python-pygeoip packages here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1155400
Another one has also began but without any response for
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #71 from Pablo Rodríguez fed...@pragmata.tk ---
(In reply to nicolas.vieville from comment #69)
Pablo,
As this package is not yet approved, I voluntary do not bump release version
for each upgrade I do. The only thing I do is
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #72 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Pablo,
According to these rules
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Snapshot_packages
I shouldn't have used only the git hash in
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #67 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello,
Last upgrade from last upstream release. New SPEC, SRPMS files and noarch RPMS
packages for testing are provided (F-20, F-21 and Rawhide - see above to know
how to compose
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #68 from Pablo Rodríguez fed...@pragmata.tk ---
Nicholas,
many thanks for the new package.
I have just downloaded and recompiled for F20 with rpmbuild --rebuild
--clean.
But when I try to install it with rpm -Uhv, I get the
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #69 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Pablo,
As this package is not yet approved, I voluntary do not bump release version
for each upgrade I do. The only thing I do is to update the git hash number,
but as this is a
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #66 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
(In reply to Jeff Peeler from comment #65)
You don't need to ask permission for reviewing other packages.
Ok.
Just review
the package so that you can show a sponsor, Hey, I
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #65 from Jeff Peeler jpee...@redhat.com ---
You don't need to ask permission for reviewing other packages. Just review the
package so that you can show a sponsor, Hey, I know enough about packaging to
be trusted to generally do the
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #64 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Jeff,
Thank you for your message and the clarification you provided. I know that I
must review some other packages in order to become a Fedora packager if I want
this package being
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #63 from Jeff Peeler jpee...@redhat.com ---
This review is nearly 3 years old. Nicolas, it looks like over time you've been
informed several times that you need to review other packages to become a
packager, which would allow you to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #62 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello Community,
Last upgrade from last upstream release. New SPEC, SRPMS files and noarch RPMS
packages for testing are provided (F-20, ***new*** F-21 and Rawhide - see above
to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #60 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello Community,
Last upgrade from last upstream release. New SPEC, SRPMS files and noarch RPMS
packages for testing are provided (F-20 and Rawhide - see above to know how to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #61 from Pablo Rodríguez fed...@pragmata.tk ---
Many thanks for your new release, Nicolas. I recompiled and installed it on my
computer.
Any plans to include this package in the repositories?
--
You are receiving this mail
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #59 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello Community,
Last upgrade from last upstream release. New SPEC, SRPMS files and noarch RPMS
packages for testing are provided (F-20 and Rawhide). New rpmlint reports
provided
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #57 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
(In reply to Pablo Rodríguez from comment #56)
They say no news is good news. But I’m afraid this might not be the case.
I cannot review the package, although I can point to an
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #58 from Pablo Rodríguez fed...@pragmata.tk ---
(In reply to nicolas.vieville from comment #57)
Thank you for reporting this upstream:
https://github.com/paradoxxxzero/gnome-shell-system-monitor-applet/issues/236
I've already
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #56 from Pablo Rodríguez fed...@pragmata.tk ---
They say no news is good news. But I’m afraid this might not be the case.
I cannot review the package, although I can point to an unsatisfied dependency
(it might be a bug).
In
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #55 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello Community,
As Pablo pointed it, this extension needs update in order to work with F-20,
so: quick upgrade from last upstream release only for F-20 and Rawhide. New
SPEC,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #54 from Pablo Rodríguez fed...@pragmata.tk ---
Nicolas,
as Steven wrote three months ago, is there any update on this?
It is a really useful extension that I like to use with Fedora 20.
Thanks for your excellent work,
Pablo
--
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #53 from Steven Dake sd...@redhat.com ---
NVieville,
Hope your travel was enjoyable :) any updates on your end?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #52 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Steven,
Thank you for your constant support. As I said in my previous post, I want to
go further in this process. But last months have been heavy loaded in life and
at work. From
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #51 from Steven Dake sd...@redhat.com ---
Nicolas,
Before I can sponsor you, I need to see 2-3 package reviews you have executed.
If you are unable to review some packages to show you understand the packaging
guidelines, I will be
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #50 from Steven Dake sd...@redhat.com ---
Nicolas,
Did you happen to review any packages? This is required for sponsorship.
Perhaps 2 or 3 packages would be sufficient. You won't be able to approve
them, but you can check them for
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #49 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello Community,
Quick upgrade from last upstream release. New SPEC, SRPMS files and noarch RPMS
packages for testing are provided. New rpmlint reports provided too.
Caution:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
Steven Dake sd...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-review?
---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #48 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Steven,
My sincere apologies for what appears to be abandoning this review. I can
assure you this is not the case. I was on leave from work for personal
reasons.
I never had a
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #46 from Taunus codezi...@suomi24.fi ---
The Gnome 3 components should be available from repositories and be system
wide.
Fixing the broken by default Gnome 3 by installing various plugins and
extensions from web
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #44 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello Community,
Happy New Year Community!
Quick upgrade from last upstream release. New SPEC, SRPMS files and noarch RPMS
packages for testing are provided. New
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #45 from Didier d-bugzi...@moens.cc ---
(In reply to comment #44)
package is a system wide installation. Each solution has its advantages and
disadvantages, but today I'm not sure that a system wide applet is the
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #43 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello Community,
Quick upgrade from last upstream release. New SPEC, SRPMS files and noarch RPMS
packages for testing are provided. New rpmlint reports provided too.
Caution:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #42 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello Community,
Quick upgrade from last upstream release. New SPEC, SRPMS files and noarch RPMS
packages for testing are provided. New rpmlint reports provided too.
Caution:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #41 from Taunus codezi...@suomi24.fi ---
The cores show up properly after reboot/relogin.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
Taunus codezi...@suomi24.fi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||codezi...@suomi24.fi
---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #40 from Taunus codezi...@suomi24.fi ---
And I did not try the other packages
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #38 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello Community,
Quick upgrade from last upstream release before going further.
New SPEC, SRPMS files and noarch RPMS packages for testing are provided. New
rpmlint reports provided
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #33 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
(In reply to comment #29)
Steven,
I'll sponsor you.
Thank you for the interst you show on this Review Request, and your proposal to
sponsor me.
To join the packager group you
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #34 from Steven Dake sd...@redhat.com ---
No problem on delays. Yes 177841 is the right bug to find atleast two bugs to
provide reviews of.
Regards
-steve
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #35 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
(In reply to comment #31)
Jeff,
Thank you very much for your review and your advice. This make this package
more conform regarding Fedora Packaging Guidelines. Sorry for my late
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #36 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com ---
Re: comment 34
Not really. Bug 177841 is just the need-sponsor queue:
http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/NEEDSPONSOR.html
It is not the full list of package review
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #37 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hi again community,
Thanks Michael for pointing these links too.
In response to my own comment #35, upstream developer of this extension, just
agreed my request and added a license
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #31 from Jeff Peeler jpee...@redhat.com ---
Will follow up with the source github url in another comment. It does appear
that I was wrong about find -exec simplifying the translations, so do as you
please.
Package Review
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
Steven Dake sd...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #30 from Steven Dake sd...@redhat.com ---
Jeff,
Please continue to provide an unofficial review.
Thanks
-steve
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #28 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello community,
Jeff, thank you for your advice. So here are the new SPEC, SRPMS files and
noarch RPMS packages for testing and modified as possible as you asked for.
Rpmlint output
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #27 from Jeff Peeler jpee...@redhat.com ---
This mostly looks good, a few next steps:
1) Remove defattr as it is not required.
2) The github downloading stuff looks weird. I'm not sure where the gitsub part
came from (although I'm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #26 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello Community,
New upstream release (improvement in localization, but some strings need to
translated, and nfs shares added to drive section), and as usual new SPEC,
SRPMS files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #25 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello Community,
New upstream release, and as usual new SPEC, SRPMS files and noarch RPMS
packages for testing. New rpmlint reports provided too.
Caution: previous version of SRPMS
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #23 from Didier d-bugzi...@moens.cc ---
Nicolas,
Your continued efforts are much appreciated.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #24 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
(In reply to comment #23)
Nicolas,
Your continued efforts are much appreciated.
Thanks for your encouragement!
--
NVieville
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #21 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Hello Community,
New upstream and bug correction release, and as usual new SPEC, SRPMS files and
noarch RPMS packages for testing. New rpmlint reports provided too.
Caution:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #22 from nicolas.vievi...@univ-valenciennes.fr ---
(In reply to comment #21)
Hello (again)
Corrected URLs for RPMS of my previous message #21 (.rpm extensions vanished
while the copy/paste operation from the Dropbox URLs). Sorry for
1 - 100 of 121 matches
Mail list logo