Bugzilla will be upgraded to version 5.0 on a still to be determined date in the near future. The original upgrade date has been delayed.
Bug 226659 - Merge Review: xsri
Merge Review: xsri
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review (Show other bugs)
All Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Orcan Ogetbil
Fedora Package Reviews List
Depends On:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2007-01-31 16:35 EST by Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it
Modified: 2012-06-15 12:26 EDT (History)
5 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2012-04-17 15:26:19 EDT
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it 2007-01-31 16:35:34 EST
Fedora Merge Review: xsri

Initial Owner: sandmann@redhat.com
Comment 1 Orcan Ogetbil 2008-12-02 22:47:39 EST
Here is the long awaited review for this package:

* Description: The description is insufficient. The term "root window" does not mean much to most people. What does "displays images on the root window" mean? I think it should be replaced by modern day terms such as "sets the wallpaper".

* rpmlint says:
    xsri.spec:20: W: setup-not-quiet
       Use a -q flag on %setup macro
    xsri.spec: E: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install
       buildroot must be cleaned at the beginning of %install
    xsri.src: W: no-url-tag
       I guess this package does not have an URL at all, so this is fine.
    xsri.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/xsri-2.1.0/NEWS
       The file NEWS is empty, doesn't need to be packaged.
    xsri.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 2.1.0-15 ['1:2.1.0-15.fc10', '1:2.1.0-15']
       Typo? Can be fixed easily.

* Group:     System Environment/Base
    Is this the best one to pick?

* We prefer %defattr(-,root,root,-)

* BuildRequires: gtk2-devel >= 1.3.13
    From the guidelines: "if the lowest possible requirement is so old that nobody has a version older than that installed on any target distribution release, there's no need to include the version in the dependency at all."
    gtk2-1.3 is ancient, so no need to use the specific version here.

* Parallel make must be supported whenever possible. If it is not supported, this should be noted in the SPEC file as a comment.

I added Jason Tibbitts to the CC since he's the last known maintainer.
Comment 2 Orcan Ogetbil 2009-01-16 15:05:27 EST
Comment 3 Orcan Ogetbil 2009-04-04 01:41:14 EDT
re-ping? shall I add someone else to CC?
Comment 4 Orcan Ogetbil 2009-06-09 15:01:59 EDT
re-re-ping? I added two other previous maintainers to CC. Please do not ignore!
Comment 5 Orcan Ogetbil 2009-12-09 22:29:21 EST

Any particular reason why this merge review is being ignored?
Comment 6 Jason Tibbitts 2009-12-09 23:16:17 EST
Just looking back at comment #1, I have no idea at all why you would think I am the last known maintainer.  I've never had anything to do with the maintenance of this package.  I fixed the license tag ages ago, but I fixed the license tags of many packages.
Comment 7 Orcan Ogetbil 2009-12-09 23:21:46 EST
and how would I know that you fixed license tag of many packages? :)
I just saw your name in the changelog as the last human who edited the package. I am sorry, my bad.
Comment 8 Orcan Ogetbil 2010-11-06 02:31:43 EDT

Almost 2 years since the review and still no progress. Why?
Comment 9 Jason Tibbitts 2010-11-06 09:04:50 EDT
The bottom line is that merge reviews aren't a priority for some folks, especially for packages like this one.

If you have a proposed patch for this or any other merge review for rarely used leaf package, ping me and I will apply it.
Comment 10 Adam Jackson 2012-04-17 15:26:19 EDT
~/fedora/xsri% cat dead.package 
This package was retired on 2011-07-25 due to it being unable to build this package for multiple releases (FTBFS).
Comment 11 Parag AN(पराग) 2012-06-15 12:26:41 EDT
This bug just popped out when I searched for packages under review but looks like this package was retired already.

Dropping the flag fedora-review?

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.