Spec Name or Url: http://www.haxxed.com/rpms/tinyfugue.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.haxxed.com/rpms/tinyfugue-5.0-0.1.b7.src.rpm Description: Hello, I have been making my own packages for many years, and it appears I can finally get them submitted somewhere. This is my first package, I will need a sponsor. I figure I'll start with something easy. TinyFugue is the ubiquitous MUD/MOO/MUSH/MUCK/etc client for UNIX. This client allows you to interact with multiple worlds simultaneously, create command macros, and create hooks and triggers for automated responses to game messages.
Builds in mock, looking pretty good so far, though I can't sponsor. Blocking FE-NEEDSPONSOR. However, one thing that can be cleaned up, don't use Epoch unless you have to.
I'm confused about that. I swear I read something ~1 year ago in the Fedora packaging guidelines somewhere about how setting Epoch: 0 was a good idea, but its not there anymore. Might have been a core thing? Bleh. I'll nuke it.
New srpm and spec, with epoch removed: http://www.haxxed.com/rpms/tinyfugue.spec http://www.haxxed.com/rpms/tinyfugue-5.0-0.2.b7.src.rpm
You may have seen older fedora.us guidlines. Good: - rpmlint checks clean - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license (GPL) OK, text in %doc, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream - package compiles on devel (x86_64) - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - no locales - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - no need for .desktop file APPROVED. I have since become a sponsor, so send me your Fedora account info.
I'd like to get an EPEL branch for this package and am willing to maintain it. Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: tinyfugue New Branches: EL-5 Owners: jussilehtola
Have you asked the current fedora maintainer if they would like to maintain it in EPEL?
(In reply to comment #6) > Have you asked the current fedora maintainer if they would like to maintain it > in EPEL? I did so twice in bug #457401, no answer.
The maintainer seems to be mostly away in any case; perhaps you'd also consider offering to co-maintain the package in Fedora. CVS done.
Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: tinyfugue New Branches: el6 epel7 Owners: psabata
Git done (by process-git-requests). el6 exists.
Right. Thanks!