Bug 1265265

So as far as I read 
 * bug 459979
 * https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=527 

the problem with this package is that the source contains avformat support and at least this must be removed from the source tarball (not by "rm -rf" at %prep). I don't know kdenlive and kino, however as far as I read the previous review request these modules must be treated similarly. And the original bug report doubts that this package is far from useful without avformat support.

Is this situation changed? (repeatedly, at least avformat suppport or so must be removed from the tarball for Fedora inclusion)

Anyway I think you should contact with current rpmfusion side maintainer first.

Agreed.  I'm not sure, and I can't update synfig without it.  I'd like to avoid moving the whole stack to rpmfusion.

Sergio, any comments on the above?

If the files under src/modules creates really loadable (i.e. to be dlopen()ed) modules, one way is to modify source on Fedora to build modules acceptable on Fedora only, and on rpmfusion build full modules (if this approach is possible), like gstreamer1 (gstreamer1-plugins-bad-freeworld is built on rpmfusion side).

Hi, 
I don't know .
MLT BuildRequires ffmpeg-devel and libquicktime-devel from rpmfusion .
MLT have one /usr/lib64/mlt/libmltavformat.so .
I never done a freeworld package and IMO with RPMFusion idle is not a good idea , but you may try , I do not object .
I'm packager maintainer because no one take care of it and IMO is a important package but I don't know much about internals ....

I made a build with avformat, kdenlive and kino removed.  Doesn't require ffmpeg.

SPEC: https://fedorapeople.org/~limb/review/mlt/mlt.spec
SRPM: https://fedorapeople.org/~limb/review/mlt/mlt-0.9.8-2.fc23.src.rpm

The problem is that this will break the kdenlive package in RPM Fusion. The mlt package currently lives in RPM Fusion, kdenlive depends on it, and it wants the modules which we cannot ship in Fedora.

Is there then someone who's willing to maintain ETL, synfig and synfigstudio in RPM Fusion?  If so, once that's in place I'll retire them in Fedora.

So can't those modules take freeworld method? If such modules are to be dlopen()ed, I think it is worth trying.

Unknown, and I lack the expertise, but patches are welcome.

(In reply to Jon Ciesla from comment #9)
> Is there then someone who's willing to maintain ETL, synfig and synfigstudio
> in RPM Fusion?  If so, once that's in place I'll retire them in Fedora.

Be in mind Synfigstudio is part of Fedora Design Suite. It will be nice to inform the suitation to Design team mailing list.

(In reply to Luya Tshimbalanga from comment #12)
> Be in mind Synfigstudio is part of Fedora Design Suite. It will be nice to
> inform the suitation to Design team mailing list.

This is a good reason to have mlt in Fedora ...



(In reply to Jon Ciesla from comment #7)
> I made a build with avformat, kdenlive and kino removed.  Doesn't require
> ffmpeg.
> 
> SPEC: https://fedorapeople.org/~limb/review/mlt/mlt.spec
> SRPM: https://fedorapeople.org/~limb/review/mlt/mlt-0.9.8-2.fc23.src.rpm

I was looking for at it takes remove avformat, kdenlive and kino , but your mlt.spec is really different of the rpmfusion [1].


+#Source0:  https://github.com/mltframework/mlt/archive/v%%{version}.tar.gz
+#Created from the above with avformat, kdenlive and kino removed.
+Source0:   v%{version}.tar.gz

You have remove things from the source ? what and how ? have you a script of what is removed ? 

[1]
https://github.com/rpmfusion/mlt/blob/master/mlt.spec
https://github.com/rpmfusion/mlt/raw/master/mlt.spec

Any update?

(In reply to Jon Ciesla from comment #7)
> I made a build with avformat, kdenlive and kino removed.  Doesn't require
> ffmpeg.
> 
> SPEC: https://fedorapeople.org/~limb/review/mlt/mlt.spec
> SRPM: https://fedorapeople.org/~limb/review/mlt/mlt-0.9.8-2.fc23.src.rpm

Jon Ciesla, have you remove things form the source ? what ? can you provide a script ? 

Thanks !

Ok, no need remove things from the source, I may try change mlt in RPMFusion to only provide : /usr/lib64/mlt/libmltavformat.so and /usr/share/mlt/avformat content, but have mlt duplicated doesn't seems bad to me, at least at begin . 

Here is my propose, just have disable avformat module because Fedora builds doesn't have ffmpeg: 

SPEC: https://sergiomb.fedorapeople.org/mlt/mlt.spec
SRPM: https://sergiomb.fedorapeople.org/mlt/mlt-6.0.0-2.fc23.src.rpm

Note : maybe I also should disable kdenlive and xine modules but they build without respective kdenlive and xine-lib sources in buildroot ...

Quick question, is it possible to make modules like mlt-core, mlt-avformat, mlt-kdenlive and mlt-disable-kino? Case in the points are kernel and wine.

(In reply to Luya Tshimbalanga from comment #17)
> Quick question, is it possible to make modules like mlt-core, mlt-avformat,
> mlt-kdenlive and mlt-disable-kino? Case in the points are kernel and wine.

To exemplify I built mlt on copr [1], just with Fedora repos, we can build all modules except avformat. In my build I don't enable or disable any modules mlt check for requirements if don't have the requirements, don't build the module, also don't build deprecated modules and dv, kino, and vorbis modules are deprecated [2]. Do you want/need any of deprecated modules like kino ? 

Anyway, can someone review my MLT package review proposed ?  I don't mind be the maintainer of MLT in Fedora , I'm already in RPM Fusion.

SPEC: https://sergiomb.fedorapeople.org/mlt/mlt.spec
SRPM: https://sergiomb.fedorapeople.org/mlt/mlt-6.0.0-3.fc23.src.rpm


[1] https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/sergiomb/buildsforF21/build/171828/

[2] https://github.com/mltframework/mlt/commit/9d082192a4d79157e963fd7f491da0f8abab683f

Hi everyone, sorry for the delay.  This fell off my radar, and I'm putting it back. :)

Sergio, this looks good, though there are some BSD-licensed bits in win32.

I'll try this with the latest synfig bits and let you know.  If all is well, I can review and you can own, if that's alright with you.

I had to use a git clone of 1.1.10 to fix build issues, but it all works.  Let me know how you want to proceed with the review.

I will try to this in next 24 hours , I'm in middle of some tasks now , but my plan is 
SPEC: https://sergiomb.fedorapeople.org/mlt/mlt.spec
SRPM: https://sergiomb.fedorapeople.org/mlt/mlt-6.0.0-3.fc23.src.rpm

with last 2 or 3 commits in : 
https://pkgs.rpmfusion.org/cgit/free/mlt.git/?h=f24

Excellent, thanks!

SPEC URL: https://sergiomb.fedorapeople.org/mlt/mlt.spec
SRPM URL: https://sergiomb.fedorapeople.org/mlt/mlt-6.2.0-1.fc23.src.rpm

please switch
%ifarch ppc ppc64
into
%ifnarch %{ix86} x86_64
otherwise remaining secondary arches (aarch64, s390x, ...) will see build failure

(In reply to Dan Horák from comment #24)
> please switch
> %ifarch ppc ppc64
> into
> %ifnarch %{ix86} x86_64
> otherwise remaining secondary arches (aarch64, s390x, ...) will see build
> failure

done , I reupload spec and src.rpm

(In reply to Sergio Monteiro Basto from comment #18)
> (In reply to Luya Tshimbalanga from comment #17)
> > Quick question, is it possible to make modules like mlt-core, mlt-avformat,
> > mlt-kdenlive and mlt-disable-kino? Case in the points are kernel and wine.
> 
> To exemplify I built mlt on copr [1], just with Fedora repos, we can build
> all modules except avformat. In my build I don't enable or disable any
> modules mlt check for requirements if don't have the requirements, don't
> build the module, also don't build deprecated modules and dv, kino, and
> vorbis modules are deprecated [2]. Do you want/need any of deprecated
> modules like kino ? 


Kino module is not needed for the Design Suite which bundles the old version of Synfig Studio. You get an idea about Synfig Studio requirement: http://wiki.synfig.org/Developer_Documentation

Jon Ciesla , can you review it ? , should I open a new bug report with me as reporter and you as reviewer  ? 

Thanks.

Yes, I'll review this one.

- rpmlint checks return:

mlt.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) transcoders -> trans coders, trans-coders, transponders
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.

mlt.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US transcoders -> trans coders, trans-coders, transponders
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.

mlt.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xml -> XML, ml, x ml
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.

mlt.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US extendible -> extensible, extendable, vendible
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.

. . .and several incorrect FSF addresses.  Ignorable.


- package meets naming guidelines
- package meets packaging guidelines
- license ( GPLv3 and LGPLv2+ ) OK, but there are some BSD-licensed bits in win32., text in %doc, matches source
- spec file legible, in am. english
- source matches upstream
- package compiles on devel (x86)
- no missing BR
- no unnecessary BR
- no locales
- not relocatable
- owns all directories that it creates
- no duplicate files
- permissions ok
- %clean ok
- macro use consistent
- code, not content
- no need for -docs
- nothing in %doc affects runtime
- no need for .desktop file
- devel package ok
- no .la files
- post/postun ldconfig ok
- devel requires base package n-v-r 

So it looks great.  You might want to address the BSD bits in the Windows portion in some way.

APPROVED

Hi, 
Should a change License to  GPLv3 and LGPLv2+ and BSD  ? 

-License:        GPLv3 and LGPLv2+
+# mlt/src/win32/fnmatch.{c,h} are BSD-licensed.
+License:        GPLv3 and LGPLv2+ and BSD


Also I report upstream the incorrect-fsf-address : https://github.com/mltframework/mlt/issues/116

I have to move the ticket to https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1351041 , please approve it again ... 

Thanks.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1351041 ***