Petr, although maybe not strictly required (sorry, but I’m not sure about this), mujs has been updated with some fixes (http://git.ghostscript.com/?p=mujs.git;a=summary). Would it be possible to have the updated version in koji? Many thanks for your help, Pablo
Hi Pablo, sure, I'll take a look. Thanks.
Okay, updated in Rawhide. Let me know if you need the update in a stable branch, too.
Petr, I wonder whether it would be possible that you add the Python bindings to mupdf, PyMuPDF (https://github.com/rk700/PyMuPDF). Release for 1.8 is almost finished, although it needs some polishing. BTW, could you take a look at bug #1280518? The package has a maintainer and I don’t know what the etiquette prescribes here. mupdf includes a patch named in the spec file %{name}-%{version}openjpeg.patch. If the spec (and the file itself) had the file name updated to %{name}-openjpeg.patch and the patch is named accordingly, the compilation problem from each new version would disappear. I have already explained this to the maintainer, but all he has done is to update the version number from patch file name. Could you take a look at this? Many thanks for your help, Pablo
(In reply to Pablo Rodríguez from comment #3) > Petr, > > I wonder whether it would be possible that you add the Python bindings to > mupdf, PyMuPDF (https://github.com/rk700/PyMuPDF). > > Release for 1.8 is almost finished, although it needs some polishing. I don't maintain any Python packages, I am not familiar with their guidelines, and since I don't speak Python, I don't feel like maintaining this one. You can add it to the wishlist [0] and hope for the best. Or even better, become a Fedora packager [1] and maintain it yourself! :) > BTW, could you take a look at bug #1280518? The package has a maintainer and > I don’t know what the etiquette prescribes here. Just be patient; ping him from time to time if necessary. > mupdf includes a patch named in the spec file > %{name}-%{version}openjpeg.patch. If the spec (and the file itself) had the > file name updated to %{name}-openjpeg.patch and the patch is named > accordingly, the compilation problem from each new version would disappear. > > I have already explained this to the maintainer, but all he has done is to > update the version number from patch file name. Could you take a look at > this? I'll remove the %{version} macro from the Patch line but I'll leave the update to Pavel. [0] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/WishList [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers?rd=PackageMaintainers/Join
(In reply to Petr Šabata from comment #4) > (In reply to Pablo Rodríguez from comment #3) > > > > I wonder whether it would be possible that you add the Python bindings to > > mupdf, PyMuPDF (https://github.com/rk700/PyMuPDF). > > > > Release for 1.8 is almost finished, although it needs some polishing. > > I don't maintain any Python packages, I am not familiar with their > guidelines, and since I don't speak Python, I don't feel like maintaining > this one. Sorry for the delayed reply, Petr I’m afraid I missed your message. > You can add it to the wishlist [0] and hope for the best. Or even better, > become a Fedora packager [1] and maintain it yourself! :) I don’t code, so I’m afraid I shouldn’t maintain any package (Python-based or not :-().
You can always learn :)
(In reply to Petr Šabata from comment #6) > You can always learn :) But at that point is when I remember that Fedora requires my personal phone number for that kind of cooperation. It is really a pity, but I cannot start thinking of other kind of contributions than bug reporting to Fedora if an email address is not enough.