Spec URL: http://lostclus.linux.kiev.ua/files/chestnut-dialer.spec SRPM URL: http://lostclus.linux.kiev.ua/files/chestnut-dialer-0.3.2-2.src.rpm Description: Chestnut Dialer is PPP dialing program, written in Python. Many Internet providers, that provide dialup service, use PPP protocol; this program helps you to connect to Internet using a modem. Current version 0.3.2 can work with GTK2, QT, and without GUI (command line interface). Chestnut Dialer uses standard pppd daemon to set up network interface.
This is my first package, and I are seeking a sponsor.
Spec URL: http://lostclus.linux.kiev.ua/files/chestnut-dialer.spec SRPM URL: http://lostclus.linux.kiev.ua/files/chestnut-dialer-0.3.2-3.src.rpm Changes: - Don't use autoreconf in spec file, use patch instead - Remove %{_infodir}/dir after install
Spec URL: http://lostclus.linux.kiev.ua/files/chestnut-dialer.spec SRPM URL: http://lostclus.linux.kiev.ua/files/chestnut-dialer-0.3.2-4.src.rpm * Mon May 29 2006 Konstantin Korikov <lostclus> - 0.3.2-4 - Patch to resolve problems with some locales like uk_UA and ru_UA I still seeking a sponsor.
* Source tag is not a URL * Use dist tag in release like: Release : 4%{?dist}
Spec URL: http://lostclus.linux.kiev.ua/files/chestnut-dialer.spec SRPM URL: http://lostclus.linux.kiev.ua/files/chestnut-dialer-0.3.2-5.src.rpm * Thu Jun 1 2006 Konstantin Korikov <lostclus> - 0.3.2-5 - Source tag is URL - Dist tag in release
Mock Build runs fine for i386 Package looks good and satisfied all packaging guidelines also. Package Approved.
I don't think Parag is entitled to approve packages actually; the review guidelines say "The primary Reviewer can be any current package owner", and Parag is not yet sponsored. I've encouraged Parag to review packages as part of the sponsorship process, but this shouldn't include approving packages. Moreover, in this case the submitter appears to be needing a sponsor, and first-time packagers should have their packages reviewed by someone that can sponsor them.
Thanks for Info Paul, From Now i will only do Review and will not change any Bug status. I thought i can do following 1. Change the blocking bug from FE-NEW to FE-REVIEW, or FC-NEW to FC-REVIEW. (FE-REVIEW is bz #163778, FC-REVIEW is bz #188267) 2. Assign the bug to yourself. 3. Review the package. as given on http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines for a Reviewer
Also theres given that 4. Take one of the following actions: * ACCEPT: If the package is good, change the blocker bug from FE-REVIEW to FE-ACCEPT or FC-REVIEW to FC-ACCEPT. (FE-ACCEPT is bz #163779, FC-ACCEPT is bz #188268) o (Extras Only) If the Reviewer is also acting as Sponsor for the Contributor, then this is the time to sponsor the Contributor in the [WWW] account system. * FAIL, LEGAL: If the package is legally risky for whatever reason (known patent or copyright infringement, trademark concerns) close the bug WONTFIX and leave an appropriate comment (i.e. we don't ship mp3, so stop submitting it). * FAIL, OTHER: If the package is just way off or unsuitable for some other reason, and there is no simple fix, then close the bug WONTFIX and leave an appropriate comment (i.e. we don't package pornography for redistribution, sorry. Or, this isn't a specfile, it's a McDonald's menu, sorry.) * NEEDSWORK: Anything that isn't explicitly failed should be left open while the submitter and reviewer work together to fix any potential issues. 5. Once a package is in FE-ACCEPT / FC-ACCEPT (or is failed), the Reviewer's job is done. [BOTTOM][TOP]
(In reply to comment #8) > Thanks for Info Paul, > From Now i will only do Review and will not change any Bug status. I > thought i can do following > 1. Change the blocking bug from FE-NEW to FE-REVIEW, or FC-NEW to FC-REVIEW. > (FE-REVIEW is bz #163778, FC-REVIEW is bz #188267) > 2. Assign the bug to yourself. > 3. Review the package. > as given on http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines for a > Reviewer That's what the primary reviewer of a package does. But the primary reviewer of a package must be a maintainer of an existing package in Extras: Reviewer A Reviewer is defined as the person who chooses to review a package. For the sake of clarity, one person takes ownership of the review. Other people are encouraged to comment on the review as well, either in the bug or on the mailing list. ***The primary Reviewer can be any current package owner, unless the Contributor is a first timer.***
Hey Konstantin. Sorry this package has been sitting here so long. ;( Hopefully you still wish to submit it. You might want to take a look at: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/HowToGetSponsored If you have some other packages to submit and/or can add some feedback on other pending reviews, that would help sponsors see that you understand the guidelines.
Konstantin: I will be closing this bug in 1 week unless you comment that you still wish to submit it.
ok, no word for a week, and someone else is working on submitting this. I am going to go ahead and close this request now.