Bug 1161483
| Summary: | Review Request: o3dgc - an open 3D graphics compression library | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | David Tardon <dtardon> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Christopher Meng <i> |
| Status: | CLOSED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | alex.ploumistos, dtardon, i, package-review, samuel-rhbugs |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | i:
fedora-review?
|
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2017-10-30 07:39:46 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
| Bug Depends On: | |||
| Bug Blocks: | 1161487 | ||
|
Description
David Tardon
2014-11-07 08:38:00 UTC
Spec URL: https://dtardon.fedorapeople.org/rpm/o3dgc.spec SRPM URL: https://dtardon.fedorapeople.org/rpm/o3dgc-0-2.fc22.src.rpm Hello, This is an unofficial review. I don't know if anyone more qualified than me will take issue with the source (re)packaging, which gives rpmlint something to complain about, but the rationale seems obvious. The patch is also pretty much self-explanatory, perhaps someone would prefer a more explicit comment someplace. There does seem to be an issue with the licenses though: BSD (2 clause) -------------- o3dgc/src/o3dgc_common_lib/inc/o3dgcArithmeticCodec.h o3dgc/src/o3dgc_common_lib/src/o3dgcArithmeticCodec.cpp MIT/X11 (BSD like) ------------------ o3dgc/js/o3dgc.js o3dgc/src/o3dgc_common_lib/inc/o3dgcAdjacencyInfo.h o3dgc/src/o3dgc_common_lib/inc/o3dgcBinaryStream.h o3dgc/src/o3dgc_common_lib/inc/o3dgcCommon.h o3dgc/src/o3dgc_common_lib/inc/o3dgcDVEncodeParams.h o3dgc/src/o3dgc_common_lib/inc/o3dgcDynamicVector.h o3dgc/src/o3dgc_common_lib/inc/o3dgcFIFO.h o3dgc/src/o3dgc_common_lib/inc/o3dgcIndexedFaceSet.h o3dgc/src/o3dgc_common_lib/inc/o3dgcSC3DMCEncodeParams.h o3dgc/src/o3dgc_common_lib/inc/o3dgcTimer.h o3dgc/src/o3dgc_common_lib/inc/o3dgcTriangleFans.h o3dgc/src/o3dgc_common_lib/inc/o3dgcVector.h o3dgc/src/o3dgc_common_lib/src/o3dgcTools.cpp o3dgc/src/o3dgc_common_lib/src/o3dgcTriangleFans.cpp o3dgc/src/o3dgc_decode_lib/inc/o3dgcDynamicVectorDecoder.h o3dgc/src/o3dgc_decode_lib/inc/o3dgcSC3DMCDecoder.h o3dgc/src/o3dgc_decode_lib/inc/o3dgcTriangleListDecoder.h o3dgc/src/o3dgc_decode_lib/src/o3dgcDynamicVectorDecoder.cpp o3dgc/src/o3dgc_encode_lib/inc/o3dgcDynamicVectorEncoder.h o3dgc/src/o3dgc_encode_lib/inc/o3dgcSC3DMCEncoder.h o3dgc/src/o3dgc_encode_lib/inc/o3dgcTriangleListEncoder.h o3dgc/src/o3dgc_encode_lib/src/o3dgcDynamicVectorEncoder.cpp o3dgc/src/test/src/main.cpp Unknown or generated -------------------- o3dgc/install/run.py o3dgc/js/index.php o3dgc/js/three.min.js You need to specify all licenses in the spec file and it would be nice to sort files in the %files section by their license. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#Multiple_Licensing_Scenarios I am away from my main system and I don't have koji setup here, so I could only test locally for x86_64. Have you tried building the package for other architectures? Spec URL: https://dtardon.fedorapeople.org/rpm/o3dgc.spec SRPM URL: https://dtardon.fedorapeople.org/rpm/o3dgc-0-3.fc22.src.rpm (In reply to Alexander Ploumistos from comment #2) > I am away from my main system and I don't have koji setup here, so I could > only test locally for x86_64. Have you tried building the package for other > architectures? http://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/dtardon/pending-review/build/83444/ The latest link to the spec file still points to the one from 0-2, not the one in your source rpm and the scripts will whine about that. I did the exact same thing a few days ago, that's why I checked :) (In reply to Alexander Ploumistos from comment #5) > The latest link to the spec file still points to the one from 0-2, not the > one in your source rpm and the scripts will whine about that. > > I did the exact same thing a few days ago, that's why I checked :) No, you did not. Otherwise you would see that the spec had been updated. Sorry, browser cache... I don't need this anymore. |