Bug 688121 - Review Request: mod_flvx - FLV progressive download streaming for the Apache HTTP Server
Summary: Review Request: mod_flvx - FLV progressive download streaming for the Apache ...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Torrie Fischer
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2011-03-16 11:42 UTC by Robert Scheck
Modified: 2011-06-15 14:58 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version: mod_flvx-0-0.1.20100525git.el4
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2011-05-29 00:01:20 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
tdfischer: fedora-review+
kevin: fedora-cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Robert Scheck 2011-03-16 11:42:08 UTC
Spec URL: http://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/mod_flvx.spec
SRPM URL: http://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/mod_flvx-0-0.1.20100525git.src.rpm
Description:
FLV streaming means it can be sought to any position during video, and
browser (Flash player) will buffer only from this position to the end.
Thus streaming allows to skip boring parts or see video ending without
loading the whole file, which simply saves bandwidth. Even H264 is more
efficient, FLV is still a common container format for videos, because
H264 is supported by Flash since version 9.115.

For using FLV streaming on the web, a pseudo-streaming compliant Flash
player, such as Flowplayer, is needed. Streaming requires that the FLV
has embedded key-frame markers (meta-data), that can be injected by any
supported tool, e.g. flvtool2.

Comment 1 Robert Scheck 2011-03-16 11:44:13 UTC
Tom, as already talked with you on IRC, mod_flvx is not being a legal issue
from your point of view, because there's nothing FLV-related itself inside.
May you just state here that officially and lift FE-Legal afterwards? Thanks.

Comment 2 Tom "spot" Callaway 2011-03-16 13:34:42 UTC
Yep. This code makes no attempt to do anything with the FLV format, not even parsing it, so there are no legal concerns that I am aware of at this time.

Lifting FE-Legal.

Comment 3 Torrie Fischer 2011-04-25 01:14:35 UTC
I'll review it.

Comment 4 Torrie Fischer 2011-04-25 02:01:44 UTC
+ = OK
- = NA
? = issue

+ Package meets naming and packaging guidelines
? Spec file matches base package name.
+ Spec has consistent macro usage.
+ Meets Packaging Guidelines.
+ License
+ License field in spec matches
? License file included in package
+ Spec in American English
+ Spec is legible.
+ Sources match upstream md5sum:

- Package needs ExcludeArch
+ BuildRequires correct
- Spec handles locales/find_lang
- Package is relocatable and has a reason to be.
+ Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good.
+ Package has a correct %clean section.
+ Package has correct buildroot
%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
+ Package is code or permissible content.
- Doc subpackage needed/used.
+ Packages %doc files don't affect runtime.

- Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage.
- Spec has needed ldconfig in post and postun
- .pc files in -devel subpackage/requires pkgconfig
- .so files in -devel subpackage.
- -devel package Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
- .la files are removed.

- Package is a GUI app and has a .desktop file

+ Package compiles and builds on at least one arch.
- Package has no duplicate files in %files.
+ Package doesn't own any directories other packages own.
+ Package owns all the directories it creates.
+ No rpmlint output. (Just a warning about an invalid URL, but github is strange, I know.)
- final provides and requires are sane:

SHOULD Items:

- Should build in mock.
- Should build on all supported archs
- Should function as described.
- Should have sane scriptlets.
- Should have subpackages require base package with fully versioned depend.
+ Should have dist tag
+ Should package latest version

I'm not entirely familiar with your Requires line. Can you explain to me why you're executing a command to determine build requirements? No other apache module package I know of requires this.

Comment 5 Robert Scheck 2011-04-25 11:57:03 UTC
Other Apache modules are doing that as well, some examples:

- http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=mod_perl.git;a=blob;f=mod_perl.spec
- http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=mod_suphp.git;a=blob;f=mod_suphp.spec
- http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=mod_fcgid.git;a=blob;f=mod_fcgid.spec
- http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=mod_cband.git;a=blob;f=mod_cband.spec
- http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=mod_evasive.git;a=blob;f=mod_evasive.spec

The goal is to ensure ABI compatibility between the httpd the mod_* package has
been built for and the combination it is currently running with. Unfortunately,
this requirement doesn't seem to be forced by the Guidelines as it IMHO should.

Please note that the command is executed on build-time, not at run-time. That
means that the package gets a runtime requirement like "httpd-mmn = 20051115",
which is satisfied by the httpd package.

Comment 6 Torrie Fischer 2011-05-20 13:23:30 UTC
I suppose that since other packages (especially the critical fcgid) are doing it, that sets a precedent.

Approved!

Comment 7 Robert Scheck 2011-05-20 13:33:54 UTC
Trever, thank you very much for the review.


New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: mod_flvx
Short Description: FLV progressive download streaming for the Apache HTTP Server
Owners: robert
Branches: el4 el5 el6 f13 f14 f15
InitialCC:

Comment 8 Kevin Fenzi 2011-05-20 22:28:20 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2011-05-20 23:44:02 UTC
mod_flvx-0-0.1.20100525git.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mod_flvx-0-0.1.20100525git.fc15

Comment 10 Fedora Update System 2011-05-20 23:44:26 UTC
mod_flvx-0-0.1.20100525git.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mod_flvx-0-0.1.20100525git.fc14

Comment 11 Fedora Update System 2011-05-20 23:44:50 UTC
mod_flvx-0-0.1.20100525git.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mod_flvx-0-0.1.20100525git.fc13

Comment 12 Fedora Update System 2011-05-20 23:45:10 UTC
mod_flvx-0-0.1.20100525git.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mod_flvx-0-0.1.20100525git.el6

Comment 13 Fedora Update System 2011-05-20 23:45:28 UTC
mod_flvx-0-0.1.20100525git.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mod_flvx-0-0.1.20100525git.el5

Comment 14 Fedora Update System 2011-05-20 23:45:47 UTC
mod_flvx-0-0.1.20100525git.el4 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 4.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mod_flvx-0-0.1.20100525git.el4

Comment 15 Fedora Update System 2011-05-25 02:59:18 UTC
mod_flvx-0-0.1.20100525git.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 testing repository.

Comment 16 Fedora Update System 2011-05-29 00:01:14 UTC
mod_flvx-0-0.1.20100525git.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository.

Comment 17 Fedora Update System 2011-06-03 05:27:18 UTC
mod_flvx-0-0.1.20100525git.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 stable repository.

Comment 18 Fedora Update System 2011-06-03 05:36:32 UTC
mod_flvx-0-0.1.20100525git.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 stable repository.

Comment 19 Fedora Update System 2011-06-15 14:54:17 UTC
mod_flvx-0-0.1.20100525git.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository.

Comment 20 Fedora Update System 2011-06-15 14:55:25 UTC
mod_flvx-0-0.1.20100525git.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository.

Comment 21 Fedora Update System 2011-06-15 14:58:51 UTC
mod_flvx-0-0.1.20100525git.el4 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 4 stable repository.


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