[Bug 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 --- Comment #39 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2008-12-30 18:45:01 EDT --- nxtvepg-2.8.1-3.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 --- Comment #40 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2008-12-30 18:54:08 EDT --- nxtvepg-2.8.1-3.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 Torsten Rausche [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #36 from Torsten Rausche [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-12-10 07:44:31 EDT --- - Package builds done - Closing this ticket -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 --- Comment #37 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-12-10 08:20:37 EDT --- nxtvepg-2.8.1-3.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nxtvepg-2.8.1-3.fc9 -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 --- Comment #38 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-12-10 08:23:39 EDT --- nxtvepg-2.8.1-3.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nxtvepg-2.8.1-3.fc10 -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 Torsten Rausche [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #34 from Torsten Rausche [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-12-09 13:40:10 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: nxtvepg Short Description: A nexTView EPG decoder and browser Owners: trausche Branches: F-9 F-10 EL-5 InitialCC: -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #35 from Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-12-09 22:21:45 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
[Bug 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841 | --- Comment #33 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-12-08 04:59:42 EDT --- Okay, now I am sponsoring you. Please follow Join wiki 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 --- Comment #29 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-12-07 10:58:18 EDT --- Umm... Sorry for delay... Perhaps I missed the mail from this bug. I will check it later. -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077
Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #30 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-12-07 12:48:52 EDT
---
Okay, now for 2.8.1-2:
* Duplicate file entry
---
129 %files
142 %{_datadir}/%{name}/
143 %attr(0755, root, root) %{_datadir}/%{name}/tv_grab_ttx.pl
---
- This causes the warning like
---
276 warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/nxtvepg/tv_grab_ttx.pl
---
because the %files entry %{_datadir}/%{name} contains
the directory %_datadir/%name itself and all files/directores/etc
under this directory.
For this package it is better that you explicitly modify
the permission of this script at %install like
---
%install
rm -rf %{buildroot}
make %{?_smp_mflags} \
.
install
.
.
chmod 0755 %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/%{name}/*.pl
---
and remove %attr( tv_grah_ttx.pl line.
Now
- This package itself is okay (but please fix above)
- Now I will sponsor you (if you are still seeking for sponsors)
-
This package (nxtvepg) is APPROVED by mtasaka
-
Please follow the procedure written on:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join
from Get a Fedora Account.
After you request for sponsorship a mail will be sent to sponsor
members automatically (which is invisible for you) which notifies
that you need a sponsor. After that, please also write on
this bug for confirmation that you requested for sponsorship and
your FAS (Fedora Account System) name. Then I will sponsor you.
If you want to import this package into Fedora 10/9, you also have
to look at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UpdatesSystem/Bodhi-info-DRAFT
(after once you rebuilt this package on koji Fedora rebuilding system).
If you have questions, please ask me.
--
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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 --- Comment #31 from Torsten Rausche [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-12-07 14:16:29 EDT --- OK, the last flaw is fixed in Spec URL: http://www.torsten.rausche.net/fedora/review/nxtvepg/nxtvepg.spec SRPM URL: http://www.torsten.rausche.net/fedora/review/nxtvepg/nxtvepg-2.8.1-3.fc10.src.rpm %changelog * Sun Dec 07 2008 Torsten Rausche [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 2.8.1-3 - The script permissions are better handled in the install section (This removes the File listed twice warning during the package build) -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 --- Comment #32 from Torsten Rausche [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-12-07 14:21:48 EDT --- === Requested sponsorship === FAS account name: trausche -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 --- Comment #27 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-29 11:37:02 EDT --- For 2.8.1-1: * License tag - As said above, the license tag should be GPLv2 and GPLv3+ * desktop file prefix - Desktop file install guidelines changed and now for new packages --vendor=fedora must be removed on Fedora. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/TomCallaway/DesktopFileVendor -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 --- Comment #28 from Torsten Rausche [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-29 13:12:39 EDT --- Spec URL: http://www.torsten.rausche.net/fedora/review/nxtvepg/nxtvepg.spec SRPM URL: http://www.torsten.rausche.net/fedora/review/nxtvepg/nxtvepg-2.8.1-2.fc10.src.rpm %changelog * Sat Nov 29 2008 Torsten Rausche [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 2.8.1-2 - The Teletext grabber is licensed under GPLv3+, changed License tag - New packages should not use --vendor=fedora for desktop files anymore The package should be in good shape again. I noticed Tom's proposal some time ago. But I didn't notice a change in the guidelines. Anyway I think the change is a good idea. -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 --- Comment #26 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-27 01:59:38 EDT --- Thanks for the explanation for the situation on this package. From your explanation the license fix is not needed. (But the license tag on the spec file needs fixing, it should be License: GPLv2 and GPLv3+. Would you fix that? I will check the other issues on your srpm (if any) later, however as currently I am on semi- vacation and the response from me may be less frequent.) -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 Torsten Rausche [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] | |oject.org) | --- Comment #23 from Torsten Rausche [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 11:16:02 EDT --- (In reply to comment #21) This depends on how this perl script is related to the rest part of nxtvepg. If this perl script uses (i.e. depends on) the rest part of nxtvepg, then the license conflict cannot be resolved only by moving it into a subpackage and this script must be removed completely. Are you sure? After reading http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/FAQ I even think it would be enough to add GPLv3+ to the License tag: cite Q: How should I handle multiple licensing situations? A: It depends on the situation. Here are some common cases: # A package has multiple binaries, some of them are GPLv2, some are GPLv3, and some are MIT licensed. In this case, you do need to list all of the individual licenses of the compiled binaries in the License tag, so it should read: License: GPLv2 and GPLv3 and MIT /cite If this is possible for binaries, it should also be possible for scripts, shouldn't it? -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 --- Comment #24 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 11:42:05 EDT --- This is the case in which GPLv2 part of the codes does not depend on GPLv3 part (i.e. GPLv2 part binaries can be rebuilt even if the codes licensed under GPLv3 are completely removed from the tarball and GPLv2 binaries does not use GPLv3 binaries in essence). So the question is how this perl script is tied to nxtvepg binary. - If this perl script can be used without nxtvepg binary (i.e. with this binary removed), then multiple licensing situation can be applied. - If this perl script essencially uses nxtvepg binary, then license needs fixing. -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 --- Comment #25 from Torsten Rausche [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-25 14:00:21 EDT --- We have following situation: [1] Nxtvepg (GPLv2) does not need the Perl script (GPLv3+). It can use the script if it is there but also runs fine without it. Both communicate with each other and exchange data. But there is no hard link between both. Nxtvepg simply pipes preprocessed data from /dev/vbi to the script, the script parses the data and gives XML as output, which in turn nxtvepg reads via pipe. My opinion is that if this is not legal then no GPLv2 UNIX tool could interact with a GPLv3+ one. Upstream also does not seem to see a problem here. [2] The Perl script (GPLv3+) can also run without nxtvepg. But it needs preprocessed input data to do something useful. This data has to come from a file or standard input. Optionally it can use the VBI device directly -- if the Perl module Video-ZVBI (GPLv2+) is available. This module is not packaged for Fedora yet. But this could be done... Because of [1] the script is included in the nxtvepg tarball. Because of [2] it is also available in its own tarball under http://nxtvepg.sourceforge.net/tv_grab_ttx I think it is enough to set License to GPLv2 and GPLv3+ and keep the script in the nxtvepg package. But I admit that my knowledge about licensing is pretty low. There is also the way to introduce two new packages (no subpackages, one for the script and one for the Video-ZVBI Perl module) and remove the script from the nxtvepg package. Of course this also means two more package reviews to work on ;-) -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] ||oject.org) --- Comment #22 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-21 11:59:10 EDT --- ping? -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 --- Comment #21 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-12 12:25:10 EDT --- (In reply to comment #19) (In reply to comment #17) - I must say this srpm (tarball in this srpm) is problematic. Almost all codes in 2.8.1 tarball are still under GPLv2 (strict), however newly added tv_grab_ttx.pl is under GPLv3+, which are, unfortunately, incompatible: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#GPL_Compatibility_Matrix You need to fix license issue first. Upstream doesn't want to change the licenses and suggests to split out the Perl script because it is not essential for the main application and can also be used stand-alone. Is it possible/allowed to move it into a subpackage with a different license tag? As the Perl script is still an experimental feature I could also exclude it for now. This depends on how this perl script is related to the rest part of nxtvepg. If this perl script uses (i.e. depends on) the rest part of nxtvepg, then the license conflict cannot be resolved only by moving it into a subpackage and this script must be removed completely. -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 --- Comment #19 from Torsten Rausche [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-10 15:58:56 EDT --- (In reply to comment #17) - I must say this srpm (tarball in this srpm) is problematic. Almost all codes in 2.8.1 tarball are still under GPLv2 (strict), however newly added tv_grab_ttx.pl is under GPLv3+, which are, unfortunately, incompatible: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#GPL_Compatibility_Matrix You need to fix license issue first. Upstream doesn't want to change the licenses and suggests to split out the Perl script because it is not essential for the main application and can also be used stand-alone. Is it possible/allowed to move it into a subpackage with a different license tag? As the Perl script is still an experimental feature I could also exclude it for now. -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 --- Comment #20 from Torsten Rausche [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-10 16:19:10 EDT --- (In reply to comment #18) If the submitter is more interested in upstream development, I can take over the package submission/maintainer-ship, or simply become co-maintainer. I don't develop upstream. I am just a daily user of it and track its development. Therefore I already package fresh releases for myself and thought other people would like this package too. I don't mind if another person would take over and maintain this package as long as this person steadily pushs new releases and is open for submissions from my side :) -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 --- Comment #18 from Lucian Langa [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-07 05:32:14 EDT --- If the submitter is more interested in upstream development, I can take over the package submission/maintainer-ship, or simply become co-maintainer. -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 --- Comment #17 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 08:33:47 EDT --- First of all: (In reply to comment #16) SRPM URL: http://www.torsten.rausche.net/fedora/review/nxtvepg/nxtvepg-2.8.1-1.fc9.src.rpm - I must say this srpm (tarball in this srpm) is problematic. Almost all codes in 2.8.1 tarball are still under GPLv2 (strict), however newly added tv_grab_ttx.pl is under GPLv3+, which are, unfortunately, incompatible: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#GPL_Compatibility_Matrix You need to fix license issue first. (In reply to comment #16) How much time will it cost then to do the same with a foreign package? I guess you will take much less time than the package you develop by yourself and release by yourself. Do I have to check every single point in that pre-reviews to get them honored? I don't know what you mean by single point, however please check at least what is written on ReviewGuidelines and Guidelines wiki How many pre-reviews will I have to do? At least one. -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 --- Comment #15 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-30 12:46:01 EDT --- I will close this bug as NOTABUG if no response is received from the reporter within ONE WEEK. -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 Torsten Rausche [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] | |oject.org) | --- Comment #16 from Torsten Rausche [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-30 16:05:09 EDT --- I did a new release in the meantime. You see I maintain the package -- as I actively use it. I just have a problem with the time I have to spend with reviewing other packages. There is an enormous list of points to check for which i needed hours for my own package. How much time will it cost then to do the same with a foreign package? Are there any helpful tools I missed? Do I have to check every single point in that pre-reviews to get them honored? How many pre-reviews will I have to do? I submitted this package because I created it for myself anyway and thought it could be useful for other people too. I am not doing it to polish my ego by getting an elite Fedora packager at any cost. Therefore I will only invest as much time in this process as is pleasing to me. - Spec URL: http://www.torsten.rausche.net/fedora/review/nxtvepg/nxtvepg.spec SRPM URL: http://www.torsten.rausche.net/fedora/review/nxtvepg/nxtvepg-2.8.1-1.fc9.src.rpm %changelog * Sat Oct 11 2008 Torsten Rausche [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 2.8.1-1 - New bugfix release - Include the (experimental) Teletext grabber - Require Perl for the Teletext grabber -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 --- Comment #14 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-22 09:40:53 EDT --- ping 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 --- Comment #13 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 03:15:18 EDT --- ping 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] ||oject.org) --- Comment #12 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-03 02:10:23 EDT --- ping 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 Torsten Rausche [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] | |oject.org) | --- Comment #11 from Torsten Rausche [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-26 02:31:12 EDT --- (In reply to comment #10) ping? Pong! Don't worry. I'm still alive, just a bit busy. I'll try this pre-review thing as my spare time permits it. I think there should be some in the next days. At the moment there is no more software I use but is not packaged in Fedora already. I think it is better to only maintain packages to which you are related usage- or development-wise somehow. -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] ||oject.org) --- Comment #10 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-26 01:23:20 EDT --- ping? -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 --- Comment #9 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-18 03:00:31 EDT --- Okay. Now this package itself is okay, so: - NOTE: Before being sponsored: This package will be accepted with another few work. But before I accept this package, someone (I am a candidate) must sponsor you. Once you are sponsored, you have the right to review other submitters' review requests and approve the packages formally. For this reason, the person who want to be sponsored (like you) are required to show that you have an understanding of the process and of the packaging guidelines as is described on : http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/HowToGetSponsored Usually there are two ways to show this. A. submit other review requests with enough quality. B. Do a pre-review of other person's review request (at the time you are not sponsored, you cannot do a formal review) When you have submitted a new review request or have pre-reviewed other person's review request, please write the bug number on this bug report so that I can check your comments or review request. Fedora package collection review requests which are waiting for someone to review can be checked on: http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/NEW.html (NOTE: please don't choose Merge Review) Review guidelines are described mainly on: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #4 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-17 04:07:56 EDT --- Assigning. -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 --- Comment #5 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-17 12:53:05 EDT --- Okay, now for 2.8.0-3: * app-defaults directory - build.log shows: --- 50 Executing(%build): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.ubLuyM 51 + umask 022 52 + cd /builddir/build/BUILD 53 + cd nxtvepg-2.8.0 54 + LANG=C 55 + export LANG 56 + unset DISPLAY 57 + CFLAGS='-O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m32 -march=i 386 -mtune=generic -fasynchronous-unwind-tables' 58 + make -j4 TCL_VER=8.5 TCL_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/share/tcl8.5 TK_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/share/tk8.5 SYS_DBDIR=/var/lib/nxtvepg all 59 gcc -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m32 -march=i386 -mtune=generic -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -Wall -Wnested-externs -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wno-pointer-sign -I. -I/usr/X11R6/include -Ibuild-i386 -DX11_APP_DEFAULTS=\/etc/X11/app-defaults/Nxtvepg\ -DTK_LIBRARY_PATH=\/usr/share/tk8.5\ -DTCL_LIBRARY_PATH=\/usr/share/tcl8.5\ -DUSE_THREADS -DUSE_XMLTV_IMPORT -DUSE_TTX_GRABBER -DUSE_DAEMON -DEPG_DB_DIR=\/var/lib/nxtvepg\ -o build-i386/tcl2c tcl2c.c --- Check the build option of -DX11_APP_DEFAULTS. A more fix seems to be needed. * Desktop file - %_bindir/nxtvepg seems a GUI application and a proper desktop file is needed: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Desktop_files -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 --- Comment #7 from Torsten Rausche [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-17 15:39:45 EDT --- Spec URL: http://www.torsten.rausche.net/fedora/review/nxtvepg/nxtvepg.spec SRPM URL: http://www.torsten.rausche.net/fedora/review/nxtvepg/nxtvepg-2.8.0-4.fc9.src.rpm %changelog * Wed Sep 17 2008 Torsten Rausche [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 2.8.0-4 - Try harder to use _datadir/X11/app-defaults -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 --- Comment #6 from Torsten Rausche [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-17 15:37:47 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) Check the build option of -DX11_APP_DEFAULTS. A more fix seems to be needed. Yes, I changed it for %install only. But it seems to be important in %build too. This is fixed in 2.8.0-4. * Desktop file - %_bindir/nxtvepg seems a GUI application and a proper desktop file is needed: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Desktop_files I am confused now. There is already a desktop file (Source1) for the nxtvepg binary and it seems to get installed properly. -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 --- Comment #8 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-17 21:28:06 EDT --- (In reply to comment #6) * Desktop file - %_bindir/nxtvepg seems a GUI application and a proper desktop file is needed: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Desktop_files I am confused now. There is already a desktop file (Source1) for the nxtvepg binary and it seems to get installed properly. Sorry, it seems I was half asleep :( I will check your latest srpm later. -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 --- Comment #3 from Torsten Rausche [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-16 19:53:17 EDT --- Spec URL: http://www.torsten.rausche.net/fedora/review/nxtvepg/nxtvepg.spec SRPM URL: http://www.torsten.rausche.net/fedora/review/nxtvepg/nxtvepg-2.8.0-3.fc9.src.rpm %changelog * Tue Sep 16 2008 Torsten Rausche [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 2.8.0-3 - Cleaned up the UTF-8 conversion - Use optflags for building - Use _datadir/X11/app-defaults instead of _sysconfdir/X11/app-defaults - Added semicolon to Categories in the desktop file -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 Itamar Reis Peixoto [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] Alias||nexTView -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #2 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-11 13:57:40 EDT --- Some remarks: ! iconv script - Not a blocker, however would you write them shorter like below? --- %setup -q for f in \ CHANGES COPYRIGHT TODO nxtvepg.1 do iconv -f ISO-8859-15 -t UTF-8 $f $f.new touch -c -r $f $f.new mv -f $f.new $f done --- * optflags - Fedora specific compilation flags are not correctly honored: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Compiler_flags You can check what flags are used by $ rpm --eval %optflags * app-defaults directory - I guess we should use %_datadir/X11/app-defaults as app-defaults directory * On my system %_sysconfdir/X11/app-defaults is not owned by any packages * Also there are no files under %_sysconfdir/X11/app-defaults * Desktop file --- 206 + desktop-file-install --vendor=fedora --dir=/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/nxtvepg-2.8.0-2.fc10.i386/usr/share/applications /builddir/b uild/SOURCES/nxtvepg.desktop 207 /builddir/build/SOURCES/nxtvepg.desktop: key Categories is a list and does not have a semicolon as trailing character, fixing --- - Category line should be Categories=AudioVideo;. -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 Torsten Rausche [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 -- 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 --- Comment #1 from Torsten Rausche [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-03 22:31:52 EDT --- Spec URL: http://www.torsten.rausche.net/fedora/review/nxtvepg/nxtvepg.spec SRPM URL: http://www.torsten.rausche.net/fedora/review/nxtvepg/nxtvepg-2.8.0-2.fc9.src.rpm All files should be UTF-8 encoded now. -- 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
