Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478007 --- Comment #12 from David Timms <dti...@iinet.net.au> 2009-01-25 01:17:53 EDT --- (In reply to comment #10) > Is it not an option to create an installation instructions document on the > wiki, Well there is enough 3-4 page documents. The point with packaging is to make it perhaps as easy as: 1. yum install vmware-requirements 2. yum -C localinstall /downloads/vmware-server*1.0.8.rpm 3. vmware-config.pl > or propose for the VMware website, that states the packages you need to > install on x86_64 / i386 before installing VMware (server)? Sure it would be great if vmware: - packaged the two free to use apps specifically for fedora (an os that they do not support - at all) - at least open sourced / GPLd the vmware-server-console app so that it can be included in distributions. (In reply to comment #11) > I use VMWare a lot but I do have a hard time seeing this making it into Fedora > even if brought to FeSCO. David Well, some individuals have rejected having this helper package on a few grounds, none of whom are able to reference a part of the "Packaging Guidelines" that it runs foul of. The other suggestion of using comps groups has the issue that it can not work in this case on x86_64. Also, there is major changes beginning development that would make comps groups essentially go away, to be replaced with on-the-fly-built metapackages that achieve mostly the same goals. see: http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/2009-January/msg00021.html http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/2009-January/msg00032.html http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.devel/102644 I was reminded that the Fedora Community make Fedora a possibility. Do we want this package in Fedora ? Let me suggest that to force the resolution of the issue, perhaps it is simplest for a sponsored reviewer to review the package. If no packaging problems are found, accept the package. Once either cvs or builds are requested, this might cause some opened eyes and lead to a FeSCO discussion / decision, if anyone cares enough to reject it... > I think it would be more productive to package this for RpmFusion That is the last resort, and we need to confirm that there is no possibility of the package being accepted into Fedora proper first, with an actual reason why not. (That is the first question that an RPM Fusion reviewer would ask - why can't it be in Fedora ?). ----- Updated Spec URL: http://members.iinet.net.au/~timmsy/vmware-requirements/vmware-requirements.spec SRPM URL: http://members.iinet.net.au/~timmsy/vmware-requirements/vmware-requirements-1.0-2.fc10.src.rpm - add missing server requires of files from pam.i386 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedorafirstname.lastname@example.org http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review