[Bug 550100] Review Request: python-olpcgames - Utilities for developing games on the OLPC platform
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=550100 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||1.6-3.fc11 Resolution||ERRATA -- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 550100] Review Request: python-olpcgames - Utilities for developing games on the OLPC platform
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=550100 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-27 15:24:25 EDT --- python-olpcgames-1.6-3.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 550100] Review Request: python-olpcgames - Utilities for developing games on the OLPC platform
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=550100 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|1.6-3.fc11 |1.6-3.fc12 -- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 550100] Review Request: python-olpcgames - Utilities for developing games on the OLPC platform
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=550100 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-27 15:29:44 EDT --- python-olpcgames-1.6-3.fc12 has been pushed to the Fedora 12 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 550100] Review Request: python-olpcgames - Utilities for developing games on the OLPC platform
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=550100 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-26 16:59:08 EDT --- python-olpcgames-1.6-3.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-olpcgames-1.6-3.fc11 -- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 550100] Review Request: python-olpcgames - Utilities for developing games on the OLPC platform
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=550100 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-26 16:59:03 EDT --- python-olpcgames-1.6-3.fc12 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 12. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-olpcgames-1.6-3.fc12 -- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 550100] Review Request: python-olpcgames - Utilities for developing games on the OLPC platform
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=550100 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||514687 -- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 550100] Review Request: python-olpcgames - Utilities for developing games on the OLPC platform
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=550100 --- Comment #10 from Sebastian Dziallas sebast...@when.com 2009-12-24 06:14:28 EDT --- Thanks everybody for working on this! I've imported the most recent versions into the branches, but trying to build on devel still gives me this [1]. Also, cvs-import fails on the F-11 and F-12 branches at some point, because the tag has apparently already been created in devel. cvs tag -c python-olpcgames-1_6-2 ERROR: The tag python-olpcgames-1_6-2 is already applied on a different branch ERROR: You can not forcibly move tags between branches python-olpcgames-1_6-1:devel:sdz:1261233260 python-olpcgames-1_6-2:devel:sdz:1261652809 cvs tag: Pre-tag check failed cvs [tag aborted]: correct the above errors first! Do we still need a rel-eng ticket to unblock it from devel? And how do we proceed with the strange tag names (which apparently lack the Fedora release number at the moment)? [1] http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1889740 -- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 550100] Review Request: python-olpcgames - Utilities for developing games on the OLPC platform
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=550100
--- Comment #11 from Sebastian Dziallas sebast...@when.com 2009-12-24
06:40:03 EDT ---
Ouch! Bad mistake here, better not leave %{dist} out. Sorry for the confusion.
--
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
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 550100] Review Request: python-olpcgames - Utilities for developing games on the OLPC platform
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=550100 --- Comment #12 from Sebastian Dziallas sebast...@when.com 2009-12-24 07:08:46 EDT --- Okay, so the package still fails to build for all branches since it's blocked. I filed a rel-eng ticket here: https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/3223 -- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 550100] Review Request: python-olpcgames - Utilities for developing games on the OLPC platform
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=550100 Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||toms...@fedoraproject.org --- Comment #1 from Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-23 12:14:23 EDT --- Just a few comments for now, because I'm unsure, if reviewing this is the right procedure... - use %global and not %define https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#.25global_preferred_over_.25define - permissions of buildmanifest.py need to be 664, like they where. But this is no executable script and contains #!/usr/bin/env Fix this with [1] to delete the shebang and not touching the permissions. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Packaging_Tricks#Remove_shebang_from_files About the procedure: It seems, the original submitter does not care anymore about this package and you want to take it. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers would be the best thing to do in this case and no new review. -- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 550100] Review Request: python-olpcgames - Utilities for developing games on the OLPC platform
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=550100 --- Comment #2 from Sebastian Dziallas sebast...@when.com 2009-12-23 17:15:53 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) Just a few comments for now, because I'm unsure, if reviewing this is the right procedure... - use %global and not %define https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#.25global_preferred_over_.25define Right, makes sense! - permissions of buildmanifest.py need to be 664, like they where. But this is no executable script and contains #!/usr/bin/env Fix this with [1] to delete the shebang and not touching the permissions. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Packaging_Tricks#Remove_shebang_from_files I thought it should be executable since it had a main() part. Anyway, thanks for the hints! I think I'll just open another bug and try to ping the original maintainer again. -- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 550100] Review Request: python-olpcgames - Utilities for developing games on the OLPC platform
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=550100 Sebastian Dziallas sebast...@when.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||550176 --- Comment #3 from Sebastian Dziallas sebast...@when.com 2009-12-23 17:24:32 EDT --- Okay, I opened #550176 to proceed with the non-responsive maintainer policy. I'm making this a dependant, as we'll presumably need a review afterwards anyway. -- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 550100] Review Request: python-olpcgames - Utilities for developing games on the OLPC platform
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=550100 --- Comment #4 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-12-23 17:36:22 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) About the procedure: It seems, the original submitter does not care anymore about this package and you want to take it. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers would be the best thing to do in this case and no new review. I suggested to open a new package review according to the following section [1]. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Orphaned_package_that_need_new_maintainers#Claiming_Ownership_of_an_Orphaned_Package_Procedure The package was never built and from my point of view a review is needed anyway. -- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 550100] Review Request: python-olpcgames - Utilities for developing games on the OLPC platform
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=550100 Bug 550100 depends on bug 550176, which changed state. Bug 550176 Summary: Please respond to #250533 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=550176 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||WONTFIX -- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 550100] Review Request: python-olpcgames - Utilities for developing games on the OLPC platform
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=550100 --- Comment #5 from Sebastian Dziallas sebast...@when.com 2009-12-23 18:53:34 EDT --- Okey dokey, so both Fabian and I have been added to the package now thanks to Noah's reply! I guess we still need this review since it has never been built. Once that's done, we'll presumably either need a cvs change request or a rel-eng ticket. Anyway, I've updated the files according to Thomas' comments. Spec URL: http://sdz.fedorapeople.org/rpmbuild/python-olpcgames.spec SRPM URL: http://sdz.fedorapeople.org/rpmbuild/python-olpcgames-1.6-2.src.rpm Would be cool to get this reviewed. Happy Holidays! -- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 550100] Review Request: python-olpcgames - Utilities for developing games on the OLPC platform
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=550100
Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|fab...@bernewireless.net
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Comment #6 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-12-23
19:18:14 EDT ---
Package Review
==
Package:
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines
[x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary RPMs on at least one
supported architecture
Tested on: F12/i386
[x] Rpmlint output:
Source RPM:
[...@localhost SRPMS]$ rpmlint python-olpcgames-1.6-2.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings
Binary RPM(s):
[...@localhost noarch]$ rpmlint python-olpcgames*
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[x] Package is not relocatable
[x] Buildroot is correct
master : %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
spec file: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
[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] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license
License type: BSD
[-] 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] Spec file is legible and written in American English
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL
Upstream source: 53146b6acf61947499061f318889b5ba
Build source:53146b6acf61947499061f318889b5ba
[x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch
[x] Architecture independent packages have: BuildArch: noarch
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[-] The spec file handles locales properly. %find_lang used for locales
[-] %{optflags} or RPM_OPT_FLAGS are honoured
[-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required
[x] %install starts with rm -rf %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates
[x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files
[x] Permissions on files are set properly. %defattr(-,root,root,-) is in every
%files section
[x] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime
[x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[-] Included tests passed successfully
[x] Package consistently uses macros
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content
[x] Included filenames are in UTF-8
[-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required
[-] Header files (.h) in -devel subpackage, if present
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackage, if present
[-] Static libraries (.a) in -static subpackage, if present
[-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present
[-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present
[-] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[-] -debuginfo subpackage is present and looks complete
[x] No pre-built binaries (.a, .so*, executable)
[-] Package contains a properly installed .desktop file if it is a GUI
application
[-] Follows desktop entry spec
[-] Valid .desktop Name
[-] Valid .desktop GenericName
[-] Valid .desktop Categories
[-] Valid .desktop StartupNotify
[-] .desktop file installed with desktop-file-install in %install
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[-] Timestamps preserved with cp and install
[-] Uses parallel make (%{?_smp_mflags})
[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] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock
Tested on: F12/i386
[x] Package should compile and build into binary RPMs on all supported
architectures.
Tested: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1889292
[x] Package functions as described
[-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files is correct
[-]
[Bug 550100] Review Request: python-olpcgames - Utilities for developing games on the OLPC platform
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=550100 --- Comment #7 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-12-23 19:20:01 EDT --- Fix: The license file is olpcgames/COPYING [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 -- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 550100] Review Request: python-olpcgames - Utilities for developing games on the OLPC platform
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=550100 Sebastian Dziallas sebast...@when.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Sebastian Dziallas sebast...@when.com 2009-12-23 19:34:08 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: python-olpcgames New Branches: F-11 F-12 Owners: kantrn fab sdz According to [1], the original maintainer isn't involved with OLPC anymore. Fabian and I'll be maintaining python-olpcgames. However, since the package has never been built before, we need new branches for F11 and F12, as well as updated settings for the devel branch, which is otherwise locked. [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=550176 -- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 550100] Review Request: python-olpcgames - Utilities for developing games on the OLPC platform
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=550100 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #9 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-12-24 02:03:40 EDT --- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
