[Bug 250970] Review Request: ivtv-firmware - Firmware for the PVR 250/350/150/500/USB2 model series
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ivtv-firmware - Firmware for the PVR 250/350/150/500/USB2 model series https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=250970 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 250970] Review Request: ivtv-firmware - Firmware for the PVR 250/350/150/500/USB2 model series
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ivtv-firmware - Firmware for the PVR 250/350/150/500/USB2 model series https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=250970 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-12 01:11 EST --- cvs done. -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 250970] Review Request: ivtv-firmware - Firmware for the PVR 250/350/150/500/USB2 model series
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: ivtv-firmware - Firmware for the PVR
250/350/150/500/USB2 model series
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=250970
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||fedora-review+, fedora-cvs?
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-11 11:15 EST ---
http://dl.atrpms.net/all/ivtv-firmware.spec
http://dl.atrpms.net/all/ivtv-firmware-20070217-17.src.rpm
All requested changes (and then some -- compat bits are completely removed,
rather than just %if %{?rhel}'d out) have been made, new spec is acceptable for
Fedora.
APPROVED.
Package Change Request
==
Package Name: ivtv-firmware
Updated Fedora Owners: athimm
Updated Fedora CC: jwilson kwizart
Nicolas is relinquishing ownership and we're handing it over to Axel.
--
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, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 250970] Review Request: ivtv-firmware - Firmware for the PVR 250/350/150/500/USB2 model series
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ivtv-firmware - Firmware for the PVR 250/350/150/500/USB2 model series https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=250970 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-05 20:56 EST --- Axel spec has been updated... I will release ivtv-firmware owership as request -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 250970] Review Request: ivtv-firmware - Firmware for the PVR 250/350/150/500/USB2 model series
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ivtv-firmware - Firmware for the PVR 250/350/150/500/USB2 model series https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=250970 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-02-23 10:36 EST --- I agree with what is written upper. I will completely release ownership of this package then. (including removal of my spec to replace it with the Axel's one, when Approved). -- 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 250970] Review Request: ivtv-firmware - Firmware for the PVR 250/350/150/500/USB2 model series
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: ivtv-firmware - Firmware for the PVR
250/350/150/500/USB2 model series
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=250970
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Review Request: ivtv- |Review Request: ivtv-
|firmware - Firmware for the |firmware - Firmware for the
|PVR 250/350/150/500 model |PVR 250/350/150/500/USB2
|series |model series
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-02-22 16:48 EST ---
Okay. So I've read over everything, including both spec files. For the most
part, I believe this boils down to a misunderstanding that has simply escalated
out of control. Whether or not the fact the two individuals have histories of
contributing to 3rd-party package repos that themselves have a history of
conflict somehow contributed more fuel to the fire, I don't know, but I wouldn't
doubt it...
Anyhow, I understand Nicolas' frustration for his review comments being
dismissed, as well as Axel's frustration over Nicolas going and submitting his
own review. Honestly, I think BOTH of you are in the wrong here, to some extent.
Nicolas, I'm not wild about seeing a competing review submitted for the very
same package you were already the primary reviewer on, especially given that
Axel posted that he was on vacation (though apparently, you were unaware of
this). It does feel a bit like hostile takeover. I understand wanting to get the
package into the distro asap, but still, it wasn't the most courteous thing. If
your problems with Axel's package can be resolved, I think you ought to
relinquish ownership back to Axel.
Axel, I'm still not wild about your spec file and all the legacy crud its going
to lay down on a clean Fedora system. Nicolas' objections to your version are
entirely valid. However, they're quite easily remedied in a way that doesn't
break RHEL compatibility. Simply wrap those sections of the spec with '%if
0%{?rhel}', which a number of other packages using shared specs between fedora
and epel do. The license files really could use renaming too, generic license
file names in a system-wide firmware directory are not cool. Pretty sure the
license doesn't prevent renaming those files to something less generic (such as
is done in Nicolas' spec). Using mv to transfer files from the sourcedir to the
buildroot also doesn't sit well with me, the sourcedir should be left intact.
Use either install or cp instead. PVR-USB2 firmware is also included, should be
mentioned in the description and summary.
So yeah, as I've already hinted... Going forward, I believe Axel should be the
owner and primary maintainer of this package *if his version can pass review*.
My reasoning, beyond what I've already said:
1) Axel submitted the package for review first, didn't abandon it (though it may
have seemed like it to the casual observer), and he's still working on it.
Abandoned package takeover guidelines don't apply here, since Axel did leave
proper notice that he was on vacation (well, moving, actually).
2) Axel basically *is* upstream for this package, and did all the legwork to
make it even *possible* for fedora to package it and distribute it. Ripping it
out from under him at the last minute simply isn't cool.
3) Axel has also submitted the ivtv userspace for review. It depends on this
package. Having the same maintainer for both of these packages only makes sense.
Of course, as stated, this is all assuming Axel does address the remaining
*valid* issues Nicolas (and myself and others) have with his version of the
package. If these issues aren't resolved by the time Fedora 9 beta release hits
the streets[*], then we stay with the current situation with Nicolas' package
and him as owner/primary maintainer.
That's my story, and I'm sticking to it. Hopefully, we can put this mess to rest
and all move along with our lives, to things far more interesting than packaging
up firmware for devices that are quickly approaching obsolescence. Thank you,
and good night.
[*] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/9/Schedule says March 13.
Suggested changes to Axel's spec in diff form, which would satisfy my own
complaints with his version:
--- ivtv-firmware.spec.orig 2008-02-22 14:44:51.0 -0500
+++ ivtv-firmware.spec 2008-02-22 15:39:12.0 -0500
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
%define version_enc 2.06.039
%define version_dec 2.02.023
-Summary: Firmware for the PVR 250/350/150/500 model series
+Summary: Firmware for the Hauppauge PVR 250/350/150/500/USB2 model series
Name: ivtv-firmware
Version: 20070217
Release: 16
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ Obsoletes: %{name}-enc < %{version_enc}
Provides: %{name}-enc = %{version_enc}
%descri
