[Bug 476440] Review Request: latexdiff - Determine and mark up significant differences between latex files
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=476440 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-02-04 21:11:36 EDT --- latexdiff-0.5-2.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 476440] Review Request: latexdiff - Determine and mark up significant differences between latex files
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=476440 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-01-16 15:20:33 EDT --- latexdiff-0.5-2.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/latexdiff-0.5-2.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 476440] Review Request: latexdiff - Determine and mark up significant differences between latex files
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=476440 Dan Kenigsberg dan...@cs.technion.ac.il changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- 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 476440] Review Request: latexdiff - Determine and mark up significant differences between latex files
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=476440 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #11 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-13 15:37:14 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 476440] Review Request: latexdiff - Determine and mark up significant differences between latex files
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=476440 Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #9 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com 2009-01-11 11:59:29 EDT --- All good. This package (latexdiff) is APPROVED by oget Please supply the SRPM (in addition to the SPEC) whenever you make an update during the review process in the future. It makes life easier for reviewers. -- 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 476440] Review Request: latexdiff - Determine and mark up significant differences between latex files
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=476440 Dan Kenigsberg dan...@cs.technion.ac.il changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #10 from Dan Kenigsberg dan...@cs.technion.ac.il 2009-01-11 13:50:00 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: latexdiff Short Description: Determine and mark up significant differences between latex files Owners: danken Branches: F-10 InitialCC: danken -- 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 476440] Review Request: latexdiff - Determine and mark up significant differences between latex files
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=476440 --- Comment #7 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com 2009-01-10 08:44:23 EDT --- Sorry, I've been away for a while. Now I'm back and we can finish up this beast. Here are a few more issues to address. * Please add the changes you made to the changelog in the future with the correct date(s). It'll be easier to see what is actually changed. That's why we keep a changelog. * Also please switch to %defattr(-,root,root,-) * We should preserve the timestamps of all the relevant files we package in the %install section. By relevant files, I mean the non-compiled files. * Please remove the commented-out line(s) that are unnecessary. Also, in the comments and in the changelog section, we use %% for macros instead of a single %, so that the macros don't expand out during package building. -- 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 476440] Review Request: latexdiff - Determine and mark up significant differences between latex files
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=476440 --- Comment #8 from Dan Kenigsberg dan...@cs.technion.ac.il 2009-01-10 15:06:54 EDT --- done. see http://www.cs.technion.ac.il/~danken/latexdiff.spec -- 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 476440] Review Request: latexdiff - Determine and mark up significant differences between latex files
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=476440 --- Comment #6 from Dan Kenigsberg dan...@cs.technion.ac.il 2008-12-28 18:58:03 EDT --- Ok, let's use version 0.5. I hope I got all your (*)s sorted. rpm passes rpmlint cleanly now. I did not see how the supplied Makefile could work. It relates to non-existing filenames and ignores the tarball directpry structure. avoiding seemed simpler than fixing it. using latexdiff is so simple that I don't think the example is really useful. I have never used latexdiff-wrap, and not anxious to try. http://www.cs.technion.ac.il/~danken/latexdiff-0.5-1.fc10.src.rpm -- 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 476440] Review Request: latexdiff - Determine and mark up significant differences between latex files
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=476440 --- Comment #4 from Dan Kenigsberg dan...@cs.technion.ac.il 2008-12-21 16:34:19 EDT --- That's fine by me http://www.cs.technion.ac.il/~danken/latexdiff-0-0.1.20071020snap.fc10.src.rpm -- 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 476440] Review Request: latexdiff - Determine and mark up significant differences between latex files
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=476440 Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|oget.fed...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #5 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com 2008-12-22 02:31:30 EDT --- * On the website http://tug.ctan.org/cgi-bin/ctanPackageInformation.py?id=latexdiff I see that version is 0.5 As you said there are different version references within the source. I would try to get in touch with the author to ask about the correct version. I think it should be OK to go with the version of the latexdiff script for the whole package, because the whole package is named after that script. * It looks like this package must be noarch. * rpmlint gives bunch of errors of these types: W: summary-ended-with-dot E: description-line-too-long W: spurious-executable-perm W: incoherent-version-in-changelog E: no-binary E: empty-debuginfo-package They are all easy to fix. ? Why don't you use the existing Makefile facility? * I think all of doc/support/latexdiff/* files should go to %doc ? The source/latexdiff/example/ can go to %doc too. What do you think? ? Is the wrapper script source/latexdiff/contrib/latexdiff-wrap useful? Should we package it? * We prefer %defattr(-,root,root,-) * I don't think Requires: perl is necessary. rpmbuild itself picks up the perl dependencies. (check with rpm -qpR package.rpm) -- 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 476440] Review Request: latexdiff - Determine and mark up significant differences between latex files
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=476440 Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil orcanba...@yahoo.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||orcanba...@yahoo.com --- Comment #3 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil orcanba...@yahoo.com 2008-12-20 17:42:35 EDT --- I think it would be better to use the pre-release notation (see kismet in [1]). By the way, your SRPM link is broken. [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Pre-Release_packages -- 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 476440] Review Request: latexdiff - Determine and mark up significant differences between latex files
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=476440 --- Comment #2 from Dan Kenigsberg dan...@cs.technion.ac.il 2008-12-15 05:44:36 EDT --- Thanks for the review. As I understand it, version 0.42 in latexdiff and version 0.3 in latexrevise relate to the versions of the separate scripts. Since I did not find any version number for the whole package, I chose the latest update date of files within. Do you have a better idea (maybe 0.0.20071020, to let upstream choose 0.43 one day in the future ?) See http://www.cs.technion.ac.il/~danken/latexdiff-0.0.20071020-1.fc10.src.rpm and http://www.cs.technion.ac.il/~danken/latexdiff.spec for updated version and license. -- 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 476440] Review Request: latexdiff - Determine and mark up significant differences between latex files
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=476440 --- Comment #1 from manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro 2008-12-15 00:29:13 EDT --- I'd say that the version number is not correct. Nowhere in the scripts or on the website do I see any reference to 20071020. OTOH there are references as Version 0.42 November 06 Bug fixes only (in the script) and Version 0.5 (on the main web page of the project) License is not correct. The website claims GPLv2+ but the scripts themselves include: #This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify #it under the terms of the GNU General Public License Version 2 as published by #the Free Software Foundation. This clearly makes them GPLv2 (not GPLv2+) -- 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
