[Bug 1448778] Review Request: cockatrice - A cross-platform virtual tabletop for multiplayer card games

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778



--- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System  ---
cockatrice-2.3.17-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 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 1448778] Review Request: cockatrice - A cross-platform virtual tabletop for multiplayer card games

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778



--- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System  ---
cockatrice-2.3.17-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 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 1448778] Review Request: cockatrice - A cross-platform virtual tabletop for multiplayer card games

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2017-06-09 15:24:33



--- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System  ---
cockatrice-2.3.17-1.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 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 1448778] Review Request: cockatrice - A cross-platform virtual tabletop for multiplayer card games

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778



--- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System  ---
cockatrice-2.3.17-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 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-2017-54dfd06b53

-- 
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 1448778] Review Request: cockatrice - A cross-platform virtual tabletop for multiplayer card games

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778



--- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System  ---
cockatrice-2.3.17-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 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-2017-8ccfa72ff5

-- 
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 1448778] Review Request: cockatrice - A cross-platform virtual tabletop for multiplayer card games

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System  ---
cockatrice-2.3.17-1.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 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-2017-b23dedc563

-- 
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 1448778] Review Request: cockatrice - A cross-platform virtual tabletop for multiplayer card games

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778



--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System  ---
cockatrice-2.3.17-1.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-b23dedc563

-- 
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 1448778] Review Request: cockatrice - A cross-platform virtual tabletop for multiplayer card games

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778



--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System  ---
cockatrice-2.3.17-1.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-54dfd06b53

-- 
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 1448778] Review Request: cockatrice - A cross-platform virtual tabletop for multiplayer card games

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778



--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System  ---
cockatrice-2.3.17-1.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-8ccfa72ff5

-- 
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 1448778] Review Request: cockatrice - A cross-platform virtual tabletop for multiplayer card games

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



-- 
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 1448778] Review Request: cockatrice - A cross-platform virtual tabletop for multiplayer card games

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778



--- Comment #14 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/cockatrice

-- 
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 1448778] Review Request: cockatrice - A cross-platform virtual tabletop for multiplayer card games

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778

Antonio Trande  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #13 from Antonio Trande  ---
Package approved.

-- 
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 1448778] Review Request: cockatrice - A cross-platform virtual tabletop for multiplayer card games

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778



--- Comment #12 from Link Dupont  ---
(In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #11)

> - Exclude all translation files in main package:

Doh. I added those two excludes.

Spec URL:
https://fedorapeople.org/cgit/linkdupont/public_git/cockatrice.git/plain/cockatrice.spec
SRPM URL:
https://fedorapeople.org/~linkdupont/srpms/cockatrice-2.3.17-5.fc25.src.rpm

-- 
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 1448778] Review Request: cockatrice - A cross-platform virtual tabletop for multiplayer card games

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778



--- Comment #11 from Antonio Trande  ---
Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed

- Exclude all translation files in main package:

%doc README.md
%license COPYING
%{_bindir}/*
%{_datadir}/applications/*
%{_datadir}/appdata/*
%{_datadir}/%{name}
%{_datadir}/servatrice
%{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/{48x48,scalable}/apps/*
%{_datadir}/oracle
%exclude %{_datadir}/%{name}/translations/%{name}_*.qm
%exclude %{_datadir}/oracle/translations/oracle_*.qm

= MUST items =

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "Apache (v2.0)", "Unknown or generated", "BSD (3 clause)",
 "LGPL (v2.1)", "GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address)", "BSD
 (2 clause)", "GPL (v2)". 971 files have unknown license. Detailed
 output of licensecheck in
 /home/sagitter/1448778-cockatrice/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown
 must be documented in the spec.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (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]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: gtk-update-icon-cache is invoked in %postun and %posttrans if package
 contains icons.
 Note: icons in cockatrice
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[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).
[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 %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
 that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or
 desktop-file-validate if there is such a file.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[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

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
 file from upstream, the packager SHOULD 

[Bug 1448778] Review Request: cockatrice - A cross-platform virtual tabletop for multiplayer card games

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778



--- Comment #10 from Link Dupont  ---
Fixed up those. I ran fedora-review myself, so I hope I cleared up everything.

Spec URL:
https://fedorapeople.org/cgit/linkdupont/public_git/cockatrice.git/plain/cockatrice.spec
SRPM URL:
https://fedorapeople.org/~linkdupont/srpms/cockatrice-2.3.17-5.fc25.src.rpm

-- 
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 1448778] Review Request: cockatrice - A cross-platform virtual tabletop for multiplayer card games

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778



--- Comment #9 from Antonio Trande  ---
- This software is looking for some private libraries which are not
packed/installed:

Error: nothing provides libcockatrice_common.so()(64bit) needed by
cockatrice-2.3.17-4.fc25.x86_64.
nothing provides libcockatrice_common.so()(64bit) needed by
cockatrice-2.3.17-4.fc25.x86_64

Why are they missing?

- Not all directories are owned:

 Note: No known owner of /usr/share/cockatrice/translations,
 /usr/share/oracle/translations, /usr/share/cockatrice,
 /usr/share/oracle

-- 
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 1448778] Review Request: cockatrice - A cross-platform virtual tabletop for multiplayer card games

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778



--- Comment #8 from Link Dupont  ---
- Use a lang_subpkg macro to build langpacks
- Clean up cmake options
- Enable debuginfo package

Spec URL:
https://fedorapeople.org/cgit/linkdupont/public_git/cockatrice.git/plain/cockatrice.spec
SRPM URL:
https://fedorapeople.org/~linkdupont/srpms/cockatrice-2.3.17-4.fc25.src.rpm

-- 
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 1448778] Review Request: cockatrice - A cross-platform virtual tabletop for multiplayer card games

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778



--- Comment #7 from Antonio Trande  ---
(In reply to Link Dupont from comment #6)
> - Removed ctest from %check
> - Split out translations into langpacks

In this case %find_lang commands do nothing. In fact, lang files are not
installed in '%{_datadir}/locale/ar/LC_MESSAGES'.

Try with these macros (as suggested in
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Langpacks):

%define lang_subpkg() \
%packagelangpack-%{1}\
Summary:%{2} language data for %{name}\
BuildArch:  noarch \
Requires:   %{name} = %{version}-%{release}\
Supplements:(%{name} = %{version}-%{release} and langpacks-%{1})\
\
%descriptionlangpack-%{1}\
%{2} language data for %{name}.\
\
%files  langpack-%{1}\
%{_datadir}/%{name}/translations/%{name}_%{1}.qm

%lang_subpkg cs Czech
%lang_subpkg de German
%lang_subpkg en English
%lang_subpkg es Spanish
%lang_subpkg et Estonian
%lang_subpkg fr French
%lang_subpkg it Italian
%lang_subpkg ja Japanese
%lang_subpkg ko Korean
%lang_subpkg nb Norwegian
%lang_subpkg nl Dutch
%lang_subpkg pl Polish
%lang_subpkg pt Portuguese
%lang_subpkg pt_BR Brazil
%lang_subpkg ru Russian
%lang_subpkg zh-Hans "Chinese (Simplified)"

%define lang_subpkg() \
%package-n oracle-langpack-%{1}\
Summary:%{2} language data for oracle\
BuildArch:  noarch \
Requires:   %{name} = %{version}-%{release}\
Supplements:(%{name} = %{version}-%{release} and langpacks-%{1})\
\
%description-n oracle-langpack-%{1}\
%{2} language data for oracle.\
\
%files  -n oracle-langpack-%{1}\
%{_datadir}/oracle/translations/oracle_%{1}.qm

%lang_subpkg cs Czech
%lang_subpkg de German
%lang_subpkg en English
%lang_subpkg es Spanish
%lang_subpkg et Estonian
%lang_subpkg fr French
%lang_subpkg it Italian
%lang_subpkg ja Japanese
%lang_subpkg ko Korean
%lang_subpkg nb Norwegian
%lang_subpkg nl Dutch
%lang_subpkg pl Polish
%lang_subpkg pt Portuguese
%lang_subpkg pt_BR Brazil
%lang_subpkg ru Russian
%lang_subpkg zh-Hans "Chinese (Simplified)"

-- 
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 1448778] Review Request: cockatrice - A cross-platform virtual tabletop for multiplayer card games

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778



--- Comment #6 from Link Dupont  ---
- Removed ctest from %check
- Split out translations into langpacks
- Updated the License tag and rebuilt the SRPM

Spec URL:
https://fedorapeople.org/cgit/linkdupont/public_git/cockatrice.git/plain/cockatrice.spec
SRPM URL:
https://fedorapeople.org/~linkdupont/srpms/cockatrice-2.3.17-3.fc25.src.rpm

-- 
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 1448778] Review Request: cockatrice - A cross-platform virtual tabletop for multiplayer card games

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778



--- Comment #5 from Antonio Trande  ---

Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed

- License analysis from https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778#c1
  is missing.

- Diff spec file in url and in SRPM.
  Update SPEC file and rebuild the SRPM.

- Consider splitting off language files in separated 'langpacks' packages.
  See
 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Why_do_we_need_to_use_.25find_lang.3F
  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Langpacks

- No tests executed:


  + ctest -V -j3
UpdateCTestConfiguration  from
:/home/sagitter/rpmbuild/BUILD/Cockatrice-2017-05-05-Release-2.3.17/DartConfiguration.tcl
UpdateCTestConfiguration  from
:/home/sagitter/rpmbuild/BUILD/Cockatrice-2017-05-05-Release-2.3.17/DartConfiguration.tcl
Test project /home/sagitter/rpmbuild/BUILD/Cockatrice-2017-05-05-Release-2.3.17
Constructing a list of tests
Updating test list for fixtures
Added 0 tests to meet fixture requirements
Checking test dependency graph...
Checking test dependency graph end
No tests were found!!!


= MUST items =

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

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.
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "Apache (v2.0)", "Unknown or generated", "BSD (3 clause)",
 "LGPL (v2.1)", "GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address)", "BSD
 (2 clause)", "GPL (v2)". 971 files have unknown license. Detailed
 output of licensecheck in
 /home/sagitter/1448778-cockatrice/licensecheck.txt
[!]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown
 must be documented in the spec.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (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]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: gtk-update-icon-cache is invoked in %postun and %posttrans if package
 contains icons.
 Note: icons in cockatrice
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[!]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[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).
[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 %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
 that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or
 desktop-file-validate if there is such a file.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: 

[Bug 1448778] Review Request: cockatrice - A cross-platform virtual tabletop for multiplayer card games

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778



--- Comment #4 from Link Dupont  ---
(In reply to Tom "spot" Callaway from comment #1)
> I'm not sure why you flagged this against FE-Legal, but I took a quick look
> at it nevertheless.

Tom, Thank you for taking the time to review. I meant to comment with my reason
but got distracted. I wanted to flag this for legal review because of content
this software makes use of. It does not distribute this content; instead it
relies on a utility distributed with the program that, at run time, can
download content from an external URL and load up a local database of content
that is then accessed by the program at run time.

Essentially this package distributes a program called "oracle" that downloads a
JSON file hosted externally (defaulting to a URL hosted on http://mtgjson.com).
That JSON file is parsed and loaded into a local database for use by the main
program.

Additionally, while cards are accessed by the program, images of the image are
downloaded from the website of the images' copyright holder.

My question is around the licensing concerns over this content. Are the
copyrights on the images or the content of the JSON file of concern in this
case? Or since they are downloaded at runtime, does that not come into the
scenario of whether this is considered free software.

> License wise, this has:
> 
> *
> 
> * Public Domain (cockatrice/resources/countries/*.svg)
> * GPLv2+ (most of the code)
> * BSD (cockatrice/src/qt-json/, common/sfmt/, 
> * GPLv2 (oracle/src/zip/)
> * CPL or LGPLv2 (servatrice/src/smtp/)
> # Webclient code (not included?)
> * ASL 2.0 (webclient/js/protobuf.js, webclient/js/long.js,
> webclient/js/bytebuffer.js)
> * MIT (webclient/js/jquery-*.js)
> 
> *
> 
> I feel like I should stop and point out here that these versions of
> jquery/jquery-ui are VERY VERY OLD. They are vulnerable to at least
> https://www.cvedetails.com/cve/CVE-2016-7103/. I strongly strongly recommend
> that you update them to the "final" releases of the v1 code for both, and
> have upstream make that change as well.

Thank you for pointing this out. I will discuss this with upstream.

> Back to the licensing, CPL is GPLv2 incompatible, so we choose the LGPLv2
> option there. ASL 2.0 is also GPLv2 incompatible, but that code is not being
> compiled into or linked with GPLv2 code, so it is not a compatibility
> concern. 
> 
> In fact, it does not look like any of the code in webclient is packaged up
> or used. Unsure if this is intentional (aka, this code is not useful
> anymore) or accidental (forgot to make a -webclient subpackage). If you do
> end up including the webclient bits, add this to the end of the license tag:
> 
> ASL 2.0 and MIT
> 
> However, I'm going to assume for now that you do not plan to include the
> webclient bits.

Correct. The way I've built the package, it does not include any webclient
code.

> You can choose to update the license tag in two ways:
> 
> * The long and absolutely correct way:
> License: GPLv2+ and GPLv2 and BSD and (CPL or LGPLv2) and Public Domain
> 
> * The simplified way
> License: GPLv2 and Public Domain
> 
> The reason you can do this is because:
> 1) We choose LGPLv2 for the smtp code.
> 2) GPLv2+ + GPLv2 = GPLv2
> 3) LGPLv2 + GPLv2 = GPLv2
> 4) BSD + GPLv2 = GPLv2
> 5) Need to call out Public Domain because that license applies to distinct
> and separate works (the SVG files)
> 
> Either way, please include the above license analysis (the bits between the
> *) as a comment above the License tag in the spec file.
> 
> If any of that is unclear, please let me know. Lifting FE-Legal.

-- 
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 1448778] Review Request: cockatrice - A cross-platform virtual tabletop for multiplayer card games

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778



--- Comment #3 from Link Dupont  ---
Updated in 2.3.17-2.

Spec URL:
https://fedorapeople.org/cgit/linkdupont/public_git/cockatrice.git/plain/cockatrice.spec
SRPM URL:
https://fedorapeople.org/~linkdupont/srpms/cockatrice-2.3.17-2.fc25.src.rpm

-- 
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 1448778] Review Request: cockatrice - A cross-platform virtual tabletop for multiplayer card games

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778



--- Comment #2 from Antonio Trande  ---
Please, update your src-package.
'hicolor-icon-theme' is required.

-- 
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 1448778] Review Request: cockatrice - A cross-platform virtual tabletop for multiplayer card games

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778

Antonio Trande  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|anto.tra...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review?



-- 
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 1448778] Review Request: cockatrice - A cross-platform virtual tabletop for multiplayer card games

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778

Tom "spot" Callaway  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||tcall...@redhat.com
 Blocks|182235 (FE-Legal)   |



--- Comment #1 from Tom "spot" Callaway  ---
I'm not sure why you flagged this against FE-Legal, but I took a quick look at
it nevertheless.

License wise, this has:

*

* Public Domain (cockatrice/resources/countries/*.svg)
* GPLv2+ (most of the code)
* BSD (cockatrice/src/qt-json/, common/sfmt/, 
* GPLv2 (oracle/src/zip/)
* CPL or LGPLv2 (servatrice/src/smtp/)
# Webclient code (not included?)
* ASL 2.0 (webclient/js/protobuf.js, webclient/js/long.js,
webclient/js/bytebuffer.js)
* MIT (webclient/js/jquery-*.js)

*

I feel like I should stop and point out here that these versions of
jquery/jquery-ui are VERY VERY OLD. They are vulnerable to at least
https://www.cvedetails.com/cve/CVE-2016-7103/. I strongly strongly recommend
that you update them to the "final" releases of the v1 code for both, and have
upstream make that change as well.

Back to the licensing, CPL is GPLv2 incompatible, so we choose the LGPLv2
option there. ASL 2.0 is also GPLv2 incompatible, but that code is not being
compiled into or linked with GPLv2 code, so it is not a compatibility concern. 

In fact, it does not look like any of the code in webclient is packaged up or
used. Unsure if this is intentional (aka, this code is not useful anymore) or
accidental (forgot to make a -webclient subpackage). If you do end up including
the webclient bits, add this to the end of the license tag:

ASL 2.0 and MIT

However, I'm going to assume for now that you do not plan to include the
webclient bits.

You can choose to update the license tag in two ways:

* The long and absolutely correct way:
License: GPLv2+ and GPLv2 and BSD and (CPL or LGPLv2) and Public Domain

* The simplified way
License: GPLv2 and Public Domain

The reason you can do this is because:
1) We choose LGPLv2 for the smtp code.
2) GPLv2+ + GPLv2 = GPLv2
3) LGPLv2 + GPLv2 = GPLv2
4) BSD + GPLv2 = GPLv2
5) Need to call out Public Domain because that license applies to distinct and
separate works (the SVG files)

Either way, please include the above license analysis (the bits between the
*) as a comment above the License tag in the spec file.

If any of that is unclear, please let me know. Lifting FE-Legal.


Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=182235
[Bug 182235] Fedora Legal Tracker
-- 
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 1448778] Review Request: cockatrice - A cross-platform virtual tabletop for multiplayer card games

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778

Link Dupont  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1364745 (FE-GAMESIG)




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1364745
[Bug 1364745] Games SIG tracker bug
-- 
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 1448778] Review Request: cockatrice - A cross-platform virtual tabletop for multiplayer card games

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778

Link Dupont  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||182235 (FE-Legal)




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=182235
[Bug 182235] Fedora Legal Tracker
-- 
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