Bug 1998821

Summary:	Review Request: ft2-clone 1.47 - FastTracker II clone
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Jonathan S. <js-fedora>
Component:	Package Review	Assignee:	Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it <nobody>
Status:	CLOSED CANTFIX	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	rawhide	CC:	opensource, package-review
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2021-11-13 15:46:38 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:	177841

Description Jonathan S. 2021-08-29 08:05:32 UTC

Spec URL: https://nil.im/ft2-clone.spec
SRPM URL: https://nil.im/ft2-clone-1.47-1.fc34.src.rpm
Description: FastTracker II clone for Windows/macOS/Linux

Aims to be a highly accurate clone of the classic FastTracker II software for
MS-DOS.
The XM player itself has been directly ported from the original source code,
for maximum accuracy.

What is FastTracker II? Read about it on Wikipedia.
Fedora Account System Username: js

Successful Koji build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=74722064

This is my second package (the first being ft2-clone, see #1998755) and I need a sponsor. I've been active in pkgsrc previously, which I used on NetBSD and macOS, but have recently migrated my main machine to Fedora. While pkgsrc does work on Fedora, having native packages is nicer, so I want to get into packaging software I am missing for Fedora, since using a system as my main system for me also means contributing.

Comment 1 Till Maas 2021-08-30 09:35:37 UTC

Thank you, here are some initial observations:

FT2 seems to be using non-free bitmaps according to the git repo: https://github.com/8bitbubsy/ft2-clone/blob/master/src/gfxdata/bmp/LICENSE.txt

These cannot be included as documented in https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main#Bad_Licenses_3

Therefore the bitmaps would need to be removed/replaced or the package needs to go to a different repository such as RPMFusion: https://rpmfusion.org/FAQ#Nonfree_repository

Also, the license information is shipped in the tarball, therefore it also needs to be shipped in the RPM using %license: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text

The Source0 flag should be
Source0:  https://github.com/OWNER/PROJECT/archive/%{gittag}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz 

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL?rd=Packaging/SourceURL#Git_Tags

This avoids tarballs that do not contain the package name like v1.47.tar.gz causing less confusion.

Comment 2 Jonathan S. 2021-08-31 19:36:00 UTC

Thank you for the review, really appreciated!

The license is definitely the elephant in the room. I completley missed the non-free graphics, sorry! So thank you for pointing that out!

Given that addressing any issues in the spec file doesn't make sense if the liccense situation cannot be fixed, I didn't do that for now and raised an issue with upstream about the license instead: https://github.com/8bitbubsy/ft2-clone/issues/23

Luckily, this seems to only affect ft2-clone and not pt2-clone (#1998755), though it also contains graphics. But I could not find anything indicating it would contain unfree graphics.

How would you prefer to handle this bug in the meantime? Should it be closed until the license situation is fixed with upstream and then a new bug be created, or should it be left open until upstream responded?