[Bug 910699] Review Request: pagekite - makes localhost servers visible to the world

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910699

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed|2013-05-03 15:18:39 |2018-03-20 13:04:15



--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System  ---
pagekite-0.5.9.2-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository.
If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

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

[Bug 910699] Review Request: pagekite - makes localhost servers visible to the world

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910699

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|CLOSED  |ON_QA
 Resolution|RAWHIDE |---
   Keywords||Reopened



--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System  ---
pagekite-0.5.9.2-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing repository.
If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-a7578c5325

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

[Bug 910699] Review Request: pagekite - makes localhost servers visible to the world

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910699



--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System  ---
pagekite-0.5.9.2-1.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-a7578c5325

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

[Bug 910699] Review Request: pagekite - makes localhost servers visible to the world

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910699
Bug 910699 depends on bug 910146, which changed state.

Bug 910146 Summary: Review Request: python-socksipychain - Python SOCKS/HTTP 
Proxy module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910146

   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

[Bug 910699] Review Request: pagekite - makes localhost servers visible to the world

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910699
Bug 910699 depends on bug 910146, which changed state.

Bug 910146 Summary: Review Request: python-socksipychain - Python SOCKS/HTTP 
Proxy module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910146

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|CLOSED  |ON_QA
 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

[Bug 910699] Review Request: pagekite - makes localhost servers visible to the world

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910699



--- Comment #12 from Lukas Zapletal l...@redhat.com ---
Finally, pagekite was pushed to testing.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 910699] Review Request: pagekite - makes localhost servers visible to the world

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910699

Bug 910699 depends on bug 910146, which changed state.

Bug 910146 Summary: Review Request: python-socksipychain - Python SOCKS/HTTP 
Proxy module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910146

   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
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 910699] Review Request: pagekite - makes localhost servers visible to the world

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910699

Bug 910699 depends on bug 910146, which changed state.

Bug 910146 Summary: Review Request: python-socksipychain - Python SOCKS/HTTP 
Proxy module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910146

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|CLOSED  |MODIFIED
 Resolution|RAWHIDE |---



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 910699] Review Request: pagekite - makes localhost servers visible to the world

[bugzilla]

Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910699

Lukas Zapletal l...@redhat.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2013-05-03 15:18:39

--- Comment #11 from Lukas Zapletal l...@redhat.com ---
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=409416

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=42lB8c62JSa=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 910699] Review Request: pagekite - makes localhost servers visible to the world

[bugzilla]

Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910699

Bug 910699 depends on bug 910146, which changed state.

Bug 910146 Summary: Review Request: python-socksipychain - Python SOCKS/HTTP 
Proxy module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910146

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Lr32RBwcOLa=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 910699] Review Request: pagekite - makes localhost servers visible to the world

[bugzilla]

Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910699

Lukas Zapletal l...@redhat.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags||fedora-cvs?

--- Comment #9 from Lukas Zapletal l...@redhat.com ---
New Package SCM Request
===
Package Name: pagekite
Short Description: system for running publicly visible servers
Owners: lzap
Branches: f18 f19 el5 el6

(If there is f19 branch already - not sure :-)

Thank you Mirek!

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=d4MxOuCZEIa=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 910699] Review Request: pagekite - makes localhost servers visible to the world

[bugzilla]

Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910699

Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-cvs? |
  Flags||fedora-cvs+

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=KyfE9jslpDa=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 910699] Review Request: pagekite - makes localhost servers visible to the world

[bugzilla]

Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910699

--- Comment #10 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com ---
Git done (by process-git-requests).

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=jtgcWDdBxfa=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 910699] Review Request: pagekite - makes localhost servers visible to the world

[bugzilla]

Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910699

Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |
  Flags||fedora-review+

--- Comment #8 from Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com ---
It is better to include that comment which explain why two licenses:

# Config files are Public Domain everything else is AGPLv3+

But OK. That was last item.

APPROVED.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Wyniubt7Uqa=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 910699] Review Request: pagekite - makes localhost servers visible to the world

[bugzilla]

Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910699

--- Comment #7 from Lukas Zapletal l...@redhat.com ---
https://github.com/lzap/spec_reviews/commit/2be6b8a5f9293503ca7cb0a04c19901471cb816e

License fixed, good point. I am not going to make another build for this one if
you do not mind.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=3PZAemkfFAa=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 910699] Review Request: pagekite - makes localhost servers visible to the world

[bugzilla]

Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910699

--- Comment #5 from Lukas Zapletal l...@redhat.com ---
All fixed:

https://github.com/lzap/spec_reviews/commit/ae62c8104a7954665bc253c3e277b0bf15533706

Builds (also for EPEL6) here:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5142265

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5142434

SRPM:
http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/2266/5142266/pagekite-0.5.5a-3.fc20.src.rpm

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=eZx1xn2YTLa=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 910699] Review Request: pagekite - makes localhost servers visible to the world

[bugzilla]

Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910699

--- Comment #6 from Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com ---
Package Review
==

Key:
[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]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm  4.4
 Note: %defattr present but not needed
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
 Note: Documentation size is 51200 bytes in 3 files.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
 are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x]: Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[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 %doc.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: No %config files under /usr.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[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
[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).

Python:
[-]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process.
[-]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
 provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[x]: Buildroot is not present
 Note: Buildroot: present but not needed
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
 Note: %clean present but not required
[x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
 from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
 translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
 architectures.
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is 

[Bug 910699] Review Request: pagekite - makes localhost servers visible to the world

[bugzilla]

Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910699

--- Comment #4 from Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com ---
Package Review
==

Key:
[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]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm  4.4
 Note: %defattr present but not needed
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: Package consistently uses macro is (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]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
 Note: Documentation size is 51200 bytes in 3 files.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
 are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x]: Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[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 %doc.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: No %config files under /usr.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[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
[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).

Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process.
[-]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
 provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[!]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
 Note: Buildroot: present but not needed
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
 Note: %clean present but not required
[x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
 from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
 translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
 architectures.
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is 

[Bug 910699] Review Request: pagekite - makes localhost servers visible to the world

[bugzilla]

Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910699

--- Comment #3 from Lukas Zapletal l...@redhat.com ---
Fixed!

Spec URL: https://raw.github.com/lzap/spec_reviews/master/pagekite.spec
SRPM URL:
http://lzap.fedorapeople.org/fedora-packaging/pagekite/0.5.5a-2/pagekite-0.5.5a-2.src.rpm
RPM URL:
http://lzap.fedorapeople.org/fedora-packaging/pagekite/0.5.5a-2/pagekite-0.5.5a-2.noarch.rpm

$ rpmlint pagekite-0.5.5a-1.noarch.rpm 
pagekite.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) localhost - local host,
local-host, holocaust
pagekite.noarch: W: name-repeated-in-summary C PageKite
pagekite.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Natively - Naively,
Negatively, Tentatively
pagekite.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.5.5a-2 ['0.5.5a-1',
'0.5.5a-1']
pagekite.noarch: W: invalid-license AGPLv3+
pagekite.noarch: E: non-readable /etc/pagekite.d/80_httpd.rc.sample 0660L
pagekite.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/logrotate.d/pagekite
pagekite.noarch: E: non-readable /etc/pagekite.d/20_frontends.rc 0660L
pagekite.noarch: E: non-readable /etc/pagekite.d/10_account.rc 0660L
pagekite.noarch: E: non-readable /etc/pagekite.d/80_sshd.rc.sample 0660L
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 6 warnings.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Xq4bEOsLEYa=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 910699] Review Request: pagekite - makes localhost servers visible to the world

[bugzilla]

Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910699

Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||msu...@redhat.com
 Depends On||910146
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|msu...@redhat.com
  Flags||fedora-review?

--- Comment #2 from Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com ---
 All the python files do have python shebang, because the upstream also
 distributes as an embedded app (in one file). If this is an issue for Fedora,
 I will have to remove this in the %build section.

Please do so. Or add executable flag to those files. Whatever you feel as
appropriate.

[!]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#BuildRequires

This package requires python-SocksipyChain but I do not see such package in
Fedora. Aha bug 910146.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=e1FXBd4V6da=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 910699] Review Request: pagekite - makes localhost servers visible to the world

[bugzilla]

Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910699

--- Comment #1 from Lukas Zapletal l...@redhat.com ---
More info at: https://pagekite.net/

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Kg84C95XEYa=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review