Bug 655333 - Review Request: tanukiwrapper
Review Request: tanukiwrapper
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review (Show other bugs)
Unspecified Unspecified
low Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it
Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
Depends On:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2010-11-20 09:51 EST by Miroslav Suchý
Modified: 2011-05-24 03:34 EDT (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2011-01-10 14:35:12 EST
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 Miroslav Suchý 2010-11-20 09:51:47 EST
I would like to maintain this package. It has already been in Fedora, but has been orphaned and since last commit passed more then 3 month. Therefore according the policy it need to go through review again:

This is the version of tanukiwrapper which already has been in Fedora (last
update on July 2010). No changes from me.

I wanted to package latest version of Tanukiwrapper, but it changed license,
which is non-free:
This is most probably non-intentional change and upstream may be willing to
release it under some free license, so I contacted them If they are willing to do
some change toward free license. But so far I wanted to get into Fedora version 3.2.3 which has been release under BSD license.
Comment 1 Steve Traylen 2010-11-24 15:51:51 EST
Given your introduction to this package and it's current state do you feel 
tanukiwrapper is well maintained?

Did you hear from upstream?

Comment 2 Miroslav Suchý 2010-11-25 10:57:03 EST
> Did you hear from upstream?
Comment 3 Alexander Kurtakov 2010-11-29 13:23:49 EST
There are a number of problems with the package and it can't go in Fedora in this way:
* you have to drop gcj
* javadoc post/postun should be removed
* jars should be installed unversioned 
* javadoc directory should be unversioned
* file permissions on doc suppackage are not defaults for no reason
* missing requires on jpackage-utils in javadoc but it installs in a directory owned by it

See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java for details.
Comment 4 Miroslav Suchý 2011-01-10 14:35:12 EST
I thought it will be much easier. I'm giving it up for now.
Comment 5 Miroslav Suchý 2011-05-24 03:34:20 EDT
If anybody stumble upon this bz - see:
for free fork of tanukiwrapper.

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