Bug 234753
| Summary: | Review Request: accerciser - An interactive Python accessibility explorer for the GNOME desktop | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Damien Durand <splinux25> |
| 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> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | ben, davidf, lxtnow, opensource, sundaram |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | Reopened |
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2009-12-11 17:53:07 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: | 201449 | ||
|
Description
Damien Durand
2007-04-01 13:19:01 UTC
Update to 0.1.3 Spec URL: http://glive.tuxfamily.org/fedora/accerciser/accerciser.spec SRPM URL: http://glive.tuxfamily.org/fedora/accerciser/accerciser-0.1.3-1.fc8.src.rpm - You should explain why you disable the debug package in the spec. - GPL is not a valid value for License: anymore: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#head-f21ae23bf2f278444e2c385463cfa74a502396b8 Any update? I know this sat around for a long time, but I'm sure it can get reviewed if Damien still wants to submit this package and addresses the above comments. Well, it's been three months since my last ping. Closing. I'd like to restart this review. Here are the updated packages: Spec URL: http://bagu.org/scratch/accerciser.spec SRPM URL: http://bagu.org/scratch/accerciser-1.9.3-1.fc12.src.rpm Ben, Please reopen a NEW review request. Otherwise the reporting scripts are going to confused. New bug submitted: Bug #546738 |