[Bug 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261



--- Comment #37 from Fedora Update System  ---
gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free-1.10.4-3.fc25, lame-3.99.5-8.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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2017-05-14 16:21:44



--- Comment #36 from Fedora Update System  ---
gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free-1.12.0-3.fc26, lame-3.99.5-8.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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261



--- Comment #35 from Fedora Update System  ---
gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free-1.12.0-3.fc26, lame-3.99.5-8.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-e750c345f4

-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #34 from Fedora Update System  ---
gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free-1.10.4-3.fc25, lame-3.99.5-8.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-e062f31edf

-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261



--- Comment #33 from Fedora Update System  ---
gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free-1.12.0-3.fc26 lame-3.99.5-8.fc26 has been
submitted as an update to Fedora 26.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-e750c345f4

-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261

Yaakov Selkowitz  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Depends On|1449467 |




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1449467
[Bug 1449467] Review Request: lame
-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261



--- Comment #32 from Fedora Update System  ---
gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free-1.12.0-2.fc26 has been submitted as an update to
Fedora 26. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-72ed1ea3c5

-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261



--- Comment #31 from Fedora Update System  ---
gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free-1.10.4-2.fc25 has been submitted as an update to
Fedora 25. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-01143cb336

-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261

Yaakov Selkowitz  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |MODIFIED
  Alias||gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-fre
   ||e



-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261



--- Comment #30 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free

-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261

Yaakov Selkowitz  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1449884




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1449884
[Bug 1449884] Retire gstreamer1-plugin-mpg123
-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261



--- Comment #28 from Neal Gompa  ---
Package Review
==

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



= MUST items =

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
 Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
 attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
[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: "GPL", "LGPL (v2 or later)", "GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or
 generated", "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "LGPL (v2.1 or later)", "FSF All
 Permissive". 363 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
 licensecheck in /home/makerpm/1397261-gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-
 free/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]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/gtk-doc, /usr/share
 /gtk-doc/html
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
 Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/share/gtk-doc/html/gst-
 plugins-ugly-plugins-1.0(gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-devel-docs)
[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.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: The spec file handles locales properly.
[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.
[x]: 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]: 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 20480 bytes in 3 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]: 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]: 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:
[x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
 file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
 Note: No 

[Bug 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261

Neal Gompa  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #29 from Neal Gompa  ---
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261



--- Comment #27 from Yaakov Selkowitz  ---
While surprised that nobody else beat me to it, I have ITP'd lame in bug
1449467.

-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261

Yaakov Selkowitz  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Depends On||1449467




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1449467
[Bug 1449467] Review Request: lame
-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261



--- Comment #26 from Yaakov Selkowitz  ---
It looks like MP3 encoding is being allowed now, so the lame backend could be
enabled here too once lame itself is added.

In the meantime, can we please get an actual review so that this can get into
F26?

-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261



--- Comment #25 from Yaakov Selkowitz  ---
(In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #24)
> This is not an acceptable response to any of my feedback. What has been
> going on in the past is not a factor my review of this now, as I want this
> package to *work*. That said, I will take a look at the other ones, but I
> still want you to fix *this one*.

You have not indicated any definite issue with the package actually *working*:

> - Please split AppStream metainfo file out into a separate source file and
> install it that way

The guidelines allow for either:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:AppData#.appdata.xml_file_creation

> - Also, please check on whether metainfo file is complete. Meaning, does it
> have enough information for GNOME Software or Plasma Discover to use the
> information to be able to select the codecs when queried by applications? I
> suspect not.

You suspect not based on what?

> > make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT
> 
> Please change to "%make_install"

The guidelines consider these equally valid:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Why_the_.25makeinstall_macro_should_not_be_used

-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261



--- Comment #24 from Neal Gompa  ---
(In reply to Yaakov Selkowitz from comment #15)
> (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #8)
> > Initial review notes:
> > 
> > - libmad is now in Fedora, so that module can be enabled
> 
> Per comments above, it's been removed upstream.
> 
> > - Please split AppStream metainfo file out into a separate source file and
> > install it that way
> 
> This is exactly how it is done in the other gstreamer1-plugins-* packages.
> 
> > - Also, please check on whether metainfo file is complete. Meaning, does it
> > have enough information for GNOME Software or Plasma Discover to use the
> > information to be able to select the codecs when queried by applications? I
> > suspect not.
> 
> Then please confirm this and file bugs against the other
> gstreamer1-plugins-* packages, because this is *exactly* what they are doing.
> 
> > > make %{?_smp_mflags}
> > 
> > Please change to "%make_build"
> 
> Ditto.
> 
> > > make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT
> > 
> > Please change to "%make_install"
> 
> Ditto.

This is not an acceptable response to any of my feedback. What has been going
on in the past is not a factor my review of this now, as I want this package to
*work*. That said, I will take a look at the other ones, but I still want you
to fix *this one*.

-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261

Neal Gompa  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?   |



--- Comment #23 from Neal Gompa  ---
I'm happy to review it, I just didn't realize an update had been posted...

-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261

Yaakov Selkowitz  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags||needinfo?



--- Comment #22 from Yaakov Selkowitz  ---
Is someone going to review this?  This is where the addition of a52dec/liba52
will have the greatest impact for F26.

-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261



--- Comment #21 from Yaakov Selkowitz  ---
Spec URL: https://yselkowitz.fedorapeople.org/gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free.spec
SRPM URL:
https://yselkowitz.fedorapeople.org/gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free-1.11.2-1.fc26.src.rpm
Description: GStreamer streaming media framework "ugly" plugins
Fedora Account System Username: yselkowitz

koji scratch build:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=18575040

Enabled the a52dec dependency and plugin.  Scratch build was against
rawhide/F27 this time, as a52dec is obviously still pending tagging into
updates-testing.

Wim, how do you want to take this?

-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261



--- Comment #20 from Yaakov Selkowitz  ---
(In reply to Matthew Miller from comment #19)
> ... I don't think we really want a package called "-ugly" in Fedora.

IIUC the plugin packages are named "good", "bad", and "ugly" after some
cultural reference.  The GStreamer website has a lengthy description of these
names and the criteria for what falls into each.

> If the plugin _formerly_ was in category 2 but is cleared and is GPL, 
> shouldn't 
> it be just moved to -good or -base? If it's in category 1, maybe something 
> like
> -non-lgpl (or -gpl, if that's what they all actually are), rather than
> "ugly"?

GPL plugins will always stay in -ugly.  In theory, it is possible that mpg123
might be moved to -good or even -base in the future, but I'm not involved with
GStreamer upstream, so I can't say if and when that might be considered.

-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261



--- Comment #19 from Matthew Miller  ---
Given comment #1:

> There are two reasons for including a package in -ugly: 1) license of 
> included code or dependent library is "stronger" than LGPL (usually GPL), 
> and/or 2) software patents.  The former should still be acceptable for 
> Fedora; as mentioned above, there are already other GPL plugins in -bad-free.

... I don't think we really want a package called "-ugly" in Fedora. If the
plugin _formerly_ was in category 2 but is cleared and is GPL, shouldn't it be
just moved to -good or -base? If it's in category 1, maybe something like
-non-lgpl (or -gpl, if that's what they all actually are), rather than "ugly"?

-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261
Bug 1397261 depends on bug 1433758, which changed state.

Bug 1433758 Summary: Review Request: a52dec - Small test program for liba52
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1433758

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE



-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261

Wim Taymans  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||wtaym...@redhat.com



--- Comment #18 from Wim Taymans  ---
I can take (In reply to Yaakov Selkowitz from comment #17)
> Spec URL:
> https://yselkowitz.fedorapeople.org/gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free.spec
> SRPM URL:
> https://yselkowitz.fedorapeople.org/gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free-1.11.2-1.
> fc26.src.rpm
> Description: GStreamer streaming media framework "ugly" plugins
> Fedora Account System Username: yselkowitz
> 
> koji scratch build:
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=18550664
> 
> The a52dec plugin is commented out pending the import of the dependency into
> Fedora.
> 
> BTW, I won't object if the GStreamer packagers want to take or co-maintain
> this.

This is probably the best way forward, there is not much in -ugly that we can
enable but it's better than creating a new package for each new plugin we can
ship. 

I can maintain this together with the other GStreamer packages.

-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261



--- Comment #17 from Yaakov Selkowitz  ---
Spec URL: https://yselkowitz.fedorapeople.org/gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free.spec
SRPM URL:
https://yselkowitz.fedorapeople.org/gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free-1.11.2-1.fc26.src.rpm
Description: GStreamer streaming media framework "ugly" plugins
Fedora Account System Username: yselkowitz

koji scratch build:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=18550664

The a52dec plugin is commented out pending the import of the dependency into
Fedora.

BTW, I won't object if the GStreamer packagers want to take or co-maintain
this.

-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261



--- Comment #16 from Yaakov Selkowitz  ---
(In reply to Peter Lemenkov from comment #14)
> Yaakov, please enable a52dec plugin as well. It's on its way to Fedora (bug
> 1433758).

I can't enable it until it's actually in. :-)

-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261



--- Comment #15 from Yaakov Selkowitz  ---
(In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #8)
> Initial review notes:
> 
> - libmad is now in Fedora, so that module can be enabled

Per comments above, it's been removed upstream.

> - Please split AppStream metainfo file out into a separate source file and
> install it that way

This is exactly how it is done in the other gstreamer1-plugins-* packages.

> - Also, please check on whether metainfo file is complete. Meaning, does it
> have enough information for GNOME Software or Plasma Discover to use the
> information to be able to select the codecs when queried by applications? I
> suspect not.

Then please confirm this and file bugs against the other gstreamer1-plugins-*
packages, because this is *exactly* what they are doing.

> > make %{?_smp_mflags}
> 
> Please change to "%make_build"

Ditto.

> > make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT
> 
> Please change to "%make_install"

Ditto.

-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261



--- Comment #14 from Peter Lemenkov  ---
(In reply to Yaakov Selkowitz from comment #13)
> (In reply to Peter Lemenkov from comment #12)
> > Turned out that mad-plugin was removed from the repo:
> 
> Well, that answers my question.
> 
> > So we should stick with mpg123.
> 
> Agreed.

Yaakov, please enable a52dec plugin as well. It's on its way to Fedora (bug
1433758).

-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261

Yaakov Selkowitz  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?(yselkowi@redhat.c |
   |om) |



--- Comment #13 from Yaakov Selkowitz  ---
(In reply to Peter Lemenkov from comment #12)
> Turned out that mad-plugin was removed from the repo:

Well, that answers my question.

> So we should stick with mpg123.

Agreed.

-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261



--- Comment #12 from Peter Lemenkov  ---
(In reply to Yaakov Selkowitz from comment #6)
> (In reply to Peter Lemenkov from comment #5)
> > I wonder why do we have libmad plugin enabled. AFAIK mad development was
> > halted ~12 years ago or so. On the contrary mpg123' development is still
> > ongoing.
> > 
> > Does mad plugin provides some extra functionality missing in mpg123?
> > Performance benefits?
> 
> mad has been around longer and therefore more established.  The mpg123
> plugin was just moved from -bad to -ugly, and also has lower rank than mad. 
> Therefore, without any additional information, I have to presume that the
> GStreamer developers consider the mad plugin to be preferred; whether that
> can or should be changed would be up to them.

Turned out that mad-plugin was removed from the repo:

https://cgit.freedesktop.org/gstreamer/gst-plugins-ugly/commit/ext?id=2f767fb

So we should stick with mpg123.

-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261

Yaakov Selkowitz  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Depends On||1433758



--- Comment #11 from Yaakov Selkowitz  ---
a52dec can be enabled pending bug 1433758.


Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1433758
[Bug 1433758] Review Request: a52dec - A free ATSC A/52 stream decoder
-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261

Neal Gompa  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||yselk...@redhat.com
  Flags||needinfo?(yselkowi@redhat.c
   ||om)



--- Comment #10 from Neal Gompa  ---
Are you still interested in getting this in? Please respond soon about this, as
I'm sure there are people who are interested in this being in.

-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261

Neal Gompa  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks|182235 (FE-Legal)   |



--- Comment #9 from Neal Gompa  ---
Since Tom okay'd it, unblocking 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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261



--- Comment #8 from Neal Gompa  ---
Initial review notes:

- libmad is now in Fedora, so that module can be enabled
- Please split AppStream metainfo file out into a separate source file and
install it that way
- Also, please check on whether metainfo file is complete. Meaning, does it
have enough information for GNOME Software or Plasma Discover to use the
information to be able to select the codecs when queried by applications? I
suspect not. See:
https://www.freedesktop.org/software/appstream/docs/sect-Metadata-Codec.html

> make %{?_smp_mflags}

Please change to "%make_build"

> make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT

Please change to "%make_install"

-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261
Bug 1397261 depends on bug 1396139, which changed state.

Bug 1396139 Summary: Review Request: libmad - MPEG audio decoder library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1396139

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE



-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261

Tom "spot" Callaway  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?(tcallawa@redhat.c |
   |om) |



--- Comment #7 from Tom "spot" Callaway  ---
(In reply to Yaakov Selkowitz from comment #3)

> In the meantime, spot, could you sign off on this cleanup?

Script looks fine.

-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261



--- Comment #6 from Yaakov Selkowitz  ---
(In reply to Peter Lemenkov from comment #5)
> I wonder why do we have libmad plugin enabled. AFAIK mad development was
> halted ~12 years ago or so. On the contrary mpg123' development is still
> ongoing.
> 
> Does mad plugin provides some extra functionality missing in mpg123?
> Performance benefits?

mad has been around longer and therefore more established.  The mpg123 plugin
was just moved from -bad to -ugly, and also has lower rank than mad. 
Therefore, without any additional information, I have to presume that the
GStreamer developers consider the mad plugin to be preferred; whether that can
or should be changed would be up to them.

-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261

Peter Lemenkov  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||lemen...@gmail.com



--- Comment #5 from Peter Lemenkov  ---
I wonder why do we have libmad plugin enabled. AFAIK mad development was halted
~12 years ago or so. On the contrary mpg123' development is still ongoing.

Does mad plugin provides some extra functionality missing in mpg123?
Performance benefits?

-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261

Neal Gompa  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||ngomp...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ngomp...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review?
   ||needinfo?(tcallawa@redhat.c
   ||om)



--- Comment #4 from Neal Gompa  ---
I'll take this review, but I'd like for spot to okay the cleanup script.

-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261



--- Comment #3 from Yaakov Selkowitz  ---
Spec URL: https://yselkowitz.fedorapeople.org/gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free.spec
SRPM URL:
https://yselkowitz.fedorapeople.org/gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free-1.10.0-4.fc26.src.rpm
Description: GStreamer streaming media framework "ugly" plugins
Fedora Account System Username: yselkowi

koji scratch build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=16566350

Cleanup script:
https://yselkowitz.fedorapeople.org/gst-p-ugly-cleanup.sh

This is based on gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free.  As libmad is still under review
(bug 1396139), I have temporarily omitted that plugin.  Perhaps we should wait
to ultimately import this until that is ready, to avoid a second potential
conflict with the external repository's package.

In the meantime, spot, could you sign off on this cleanup?

-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261

Tom "spot" Callaway  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||tcall...@redhat.com



--- Comment #2 from Tom "spot" Callaway  ---
cdio, dvdread, mad, mpg123 are all fine. It is worth noting to random people
who stumble across this that libdvdread does not natively support reading CSS
encrypted DVDs, but if libdvdcss is present, it can (we cannot include
libdvdcss in Fedora).

asfdemux, dvdlpcmdec, dvdsub, realmedia are not permissible.

Side Note: If someone in 2016+ really cares about realmedia, speak up. I can't
imagine there are that many people who care about that format.

xingmux is permissible.

-- 
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 1397261] Review Request: gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-free - GStreamer ugly plugins

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397261



--- Comment #1 from Yaakov Selkowitz  ---
There are two reasons for including a package in -ugly: 1) license of included
code or dependent library is "stronger" than LGPL (usually GPL), and/or 2)
software patents.  The former should still be acceptable for Fedora; as
mentioned above, there are already other GPL plugins in -bad-free.

Therefore, requesting legal review of the above plugins to see which (if any)
fall under the former category and can therefore be included.

-- 
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