[Bug 1823] Review request: tumbler-freeworld - Tumbler Video Thumbnailer Plugin

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1823

Nicolas Chauvet  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks|2   |


Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2
[Bug 2] Tracker: New packages awaiting review
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.___
rpmfusion-developers mailing list -- rpmfusion-developers@lists.rpmfusion.org
To unsubscribe send an email to rpmfusion-developers-le...@lists.rpmfusion.org

[Bug 1823] Review request: tumbler-freeworld - Tumbler Video Thumbnailer Plugin

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1823

Nicolas Chauvet  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
  namespace||free
 Resolution|--- |EXPIRED

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.___
rpmfusion-developers mailing list -- rpmfusion-developers@lists.rpmfusion.org
To unsubscribe send an email to rpmfusion-developers-le...@lists.rpmfusion.org

[Bug 1823] Review request: tumbler-freeworld - Tumbler Video Thumbnailer Plugin

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1823





--- Comment #6 from Ken Dreyer ktdre...@ktdreyer.com  2011-09-28 03:15:28 ---
Ok, here's my review. For reference, the original tumbler review was at
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/549593


[ yes ] rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build
produces. The output should be posted in the review.

$ rpmlint tumbler-freeworld.spec
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

$ rpmlint tumbler-freeworld-0.1.21-1.fc16.src.rpm 
tumbler-freeworld.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US thumbnailer -
thumbnail er, thumbnail-er, thumbnail
tumbler-freeworld.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US
ffmpegthumbnailer - thumbnail
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

$ rpmlint
/var/lib/mock/fedora-15-i386/result/tumbler-freeworld-0.1.21-1.fc15.i686.rpm 
tumbler-freeworld.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US thumbnailer -
thumbnail er, thumbnail-er, thumbnail
tumbler-freeworld.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US
ffmpegthumbnailer - thumbnail
tumbler-freeworld.i686: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/share/doc/tumbler-freeworld-0.1.21/COPYING

...nothing serious here.

[ yes ] The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .
[ yes ] The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
[ yes ] The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
[ yes ] The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines.

[ no  ] The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
Package is split between LGPL and GPL. See
https://bugzilla.xfce.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6781

[ n/a ] 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 must be included in %doc.
[ yes ] The spec file must be written in American English.
[ yes ] The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[ ] The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL.

Posted SRPM: 
2ef0d30750f95efe345de4655049d4f6  tumbler-0.1.21.tar.bz2
Upstream tarball: 
2ef0d30750f95efe345de4655049d4f6  tumbler-0.1.21.tar.bz2

[ yes ] The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.

Mocked on F15 i686.

[ n/a ] If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch.
[ yes ] All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
[ n/a ] The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
[ n/a ] Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must
call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[ yes ] Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[ n/a ] If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker.
[ yes ] A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not
create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does
create that directory.
[ yes ] A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific situations)
[ yes ] Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
with executable permissions, for example.
[ yes ] Each package must consistently use macros.
[ yes ] The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[ n/a ] Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The definition
of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not restricted to
size. Large can refer to either size or quantity).
[ yes ] If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime
of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run
properly if it is not present.
[ n/a ] Header files must be in a -devel package.
[ n/a ] Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[ n/a ] If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1),
then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel
package.
[ n/a ] In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency
[ n/a ] Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be
removed in the spec if they are built.
[ n/a ] Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop

[Bug 1823] Review request: tumbler-freeworld - Tumbler Video Thumbnailer Plugin

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1823





--- Comment #4 from Ken Dreyer ktdre...@ktdreyer.com  2011-07-11 02:50:16 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
 You want me to include the patch in the package, too?

To be honest I don't care at all :)

If you update the URL field per my previous comment then I'll do this review.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 1823] Review request: tumbler-freeworld - Tumbler Video Thumbnailer Plugin

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1823





--- Comment #5 from Christoph Wickert cwick...@fedoraproject.org  2011-07-11 
03:23:58 ---
Frankly speaking I'd prefer a complete review and then fix all issues found
rather than fixing individual issues, bumping the release and rebuilding. As
long as there is no severe issue that prevents testing of the package I think
we should not create additional overhead. Is this ok for you?


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 1823] Review request: tumbler-freeworld - Tumbler Video Thumbnailer Plugin

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1823





--- Comment #3 from Christoph Wickert cwick...@fedoraproject.org  2011-07-08 
11:09:58 ---
Done, see https://bugzilla.xfce.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7796

You want me to include the patch in the package, too?


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 1823] Review request: tumbler-freeworld - Tumbler Video Thumbnailer Plugin

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1823


Ken Dreyer ktdre...@ktdreyer.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||ktdre...@ktdreyer.com




--- Comment #2 from Ken Dreyer ktdre...@ktdreyer.com  2011-07-08 04:44:34 ---
URL http://git.xfce.org/apps/tumbler/; leads to a page that says no
repositories found. Is it supposed to be http://git.xfce.org/xfce/tumbler/; ?

(In reply to comment #0)
 tumbler-freeworld.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address
 /usr/share/doc/tumbler-freeworld-0.1.21/COPYING

Would you please file a bug upstream on this?

 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA  02111-1307  USA

ought to be:

 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301 USA

per http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.txt


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 1823] Review request: tumbler-freeworld - Tumbler Video Thumbnailer Plugin

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1823


Filipe Sousa nat...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||nat...@gmail.com




--- Comment #1 from Filipe Sousa nat...@gmail.com  2011-06-26 10:43:09 ---
I'm testing it on fedora 15 x86_64 and it works :)
Thank you


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.