Red Hat Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing
|Summary:||Review Request: redland-bindings - bindings for the redland RDF library|
|Product:||[Fedora] Fedora||Reporter:||Thomas Vander Stichele <thomas>|
|Component:||Package Review||Assignee:||Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it <nobody>|
|Status:||CLOSED NOTABUG||QA Contact:||Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review>|
|Fixed In Version:||Doc Type:||Bug Fix|
|Doc Text:||Story Points:||---|
|Last Closed:||2008-12-16 18:30:53 EST||Type:||---|
|oVirt Team:||---||RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:|
|Bug Depends On:|
Description Thomas Vander Stichele 2006-06-16 11:23:07 EDT
Spec URL: https://apestaart.org/thomas/trac/browser/pkg/fedora.extras/redland-bindings/redland-bindings.spec SRPM URL: http://thomas.apestaart.org/download/pkg/fedora-5-i386-extras/redland-bindings-126.96.36.199-1.fc5/redland-bindings-188.8.131.52-1.fc5.src.rpm Description: Redland is a library that provides a high-level interface for RDF (Resource Description Framework) implemented in an object-based API. It is modular and supports different RDF/XML parsers, storage mechanisms and other elements. Redland is designed for applications developers to provide RDF support in their applications as well as for RDF developers to experiment with the technology. This module adds bindings for perl, python and ruby
Comment 1 Thomas Vander Stichele 2006-06-17 15:24:36 EDT
Due to review of rasqal, I've made some additional changes to this package. New src.rpm up at http://thomas.apestaart.org/download/pkg/fedora-5-i386-extras/redland-bindings-184.108.40.206-2.fc5/redland-bindings-220.127.116.11-2.fc5.src.rpm
Comment 3 Thomas Vander Stichele 2007-02-03 17:20:11 EST
Comment 4 Thomas Vander Stichele 2007-02-03 17:34:29 EST
sorry, that was supposed to go in the other bug report :)
Comment 5 Jason Tibbitts 2007-07-28 12:22:25 EDT
This has been sitting around for a really long time; is there anything that's stopping it from being reviewed? I assume it needs redland; is that done now?
Comment 6 Jason Tibbitts 2007-11-03 14:33:35 EDT
There's been no response for months now, and it's been in needinfo for over a month. I will close this ticket soon if there's no response.
Comment 7 Dave Malcolm 2007-11-12 17:08:11 EST
redland is in FC-6, F-7 onwards in CVS at least, FWIW
Comment 8 Jason Tibbitts 2007-11-18 20:45:46 EST
It's been another two weeks with no response; closing.
Comment 9 Thomas Vander Stichele 2008-11-09 11:41:11 EST
So what should I do if I actually want to get this reviewed ? It seems it's just a structural problem of not being able to get reviewers for certain kinds of packages, which is a shame. I'll reopen jsut so it gets on someone's radar and someone can tell me what my options are if I want this reviewed.
Comment 10 Jason Tibbitts 2008-11-10 11:36:29 EST
I don't understand how you see this as a structural problem; I was here and willing to review this package, but you failed to respond. If you want a review now, a good place to start would be to make sure the package still builds and to release any updates that are necessary.
Comment 11 Till Maas 2008-12-10 07:45:37 EST
There is a newer version of the package available, please update and notice comment:10 to get this reviewed.
Comment 12 Jason Tibbitts 2008-12-10 11:47:59 EST
Yes, this ticket is coming around to being closed, again, due to submitter inaction.
Comment 13 Jason Tibbitts 2008-12-16 18:30:53 EST
Looks like nothing's going to happen here. Well, we tried.