Bug 998774 (evas_generic_loaders)
| Summary: | Review Request: evas_generic_loaders - Extra loaders for GPL loaders and unstable libraries | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Dan Mashal <dan.mashal> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Christopher Meng <i> |
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | a.badger, bugs.michael, i, leigh123linux, metherid, misc, notting, rdieter |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | i:
fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+ |
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2013-09-23 08:34:05 UTC | Type: | Bug |
| 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: | 890717, 954132 | ||
| Bug Blocks: | |||
|
Description
Dan Mashal
2013-08-20 04:05:43 UTC
This review needs to be done ASAP. What's the deal Chris? Chris please review in 24 hours or we are areassigning. btw you may find "fedora-review -b 998774 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64" helpful Hi Dan, I will review it at 30 min. later. Don't worry. Package is GOOD. APPROVED. Only one issue: Please notify upstream of the license file with incorrect FSF address issue. Thanks Chris New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: evas_generic_loaders Short Description: Extra loaders for GPL loaders and unstable libraries Owners: vicodan sundaram spot Branches: f19 Git done (by process-git-requests). evas_generic_loaders-1.7.8-1.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/evas_generic_loaders-1.7.8-1.fc19 evas_generic_loaders-1.7.8-1.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 testing repository. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Separators => evas_generic_loaders-1.7.8-1.fc21.src.rpm => evas_generic_loaders-1.7.8-1.fc21.i686 in fedora-development-i386 File conflict with: evas-generic-loaders-1.7.7-4.fc20.i686 /usr/lib/evas/utils/evas_image_loader.pdf /usr/lib/evas/utils/evas_image_loader.ps /usr/lib/evas/utils/evas_image_loader.raw /usr/lib/evas/utils/evas_image_loader.svg /usr/lib/evas/utils/evas_image_loader.xcf Hi Dan, Hint, use %exclude in %files to remove them. Guidelines also say | packages where the upstream name naturally contains an underscore | are excluded from this. however, the upstream name is not limited to the tarball name. README and NEWS files call it "Evas generic loaders", so evas-generic-loaders is more correct naming at Fedora. Re: comment 12 Christopher, package "evas-generic-loaders" is in Fedora already: bug 890717 That's what my comment is about. imo C Meng's review was poor quality and he should have picked up that the package already existed. bad bad & even worst! (In reply to leigh scott from comment #15) > imo C Meng's review was poor quality and he should have picked up that the > package already existed. bad bad & even worst! Well, that's not my problem. A package already existing is something that a package reviewer should attempt to find out. It's not something that you necessarily should have known about before (or necessarily that you would have found since the names don't match exactly) but it's something that you should attempt in the future now that it's been pointed out. The not so funny thing is that _this_ package uses the upstream tarball name with underscores, and the guidelines permit that https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/336#comment:1 but the naming guidelines are not clear enough to tell what upstream name to choose. The project name is "Evas Generic Loaders", and if one constructs a package name from that, it would be evas-generic-loaders. On the contrary, the tarball name is evas_generic_loaders and permitted, too. (In reply to Toshio Ernie Kuratomi from comment #17) > A package already existing is something that a package reviewer should > attempt to find out. It's not something that you necessarily should have > known about before (or necessarily that you would have found since the names > don't match exactly) but it's something that you should attempt in the > future now that it's been pointed out. (In reply to Michael Schwendt from comment #18) > The not so funny thing is that _this_ package uses the upstream tarball name > with underscores, and the guidelines permit that > > https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/336#comment:1 > > but the naming guidelines are not clear enough to tell what upstream name to > choose. The project name is "Evas Generic Loaders", and if one constructs a > package name from that, it would be evas-generic-loaders. On the contrary, > the tarball name is evas_generic_loaders and permitted, too. You're both right as usual, in fact upstream pointed me to the package and I had no idea it already existed because I always go by upstream naming. This is nobody's "fault" and is a good learning experience for everyone. Thanks Christopher for doing the review. The bigger problem is I have no ACLs to the original package. I discussed this with Toshio on IRC. I have decided the best course of action is to retire/block this package and use the existing one including other actions which are off-topic for this bug. Regarding the package conflict I have retired this one. |