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.
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.
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?