Bug 817597 - Review Request: luola - A 2-4 player 2D caveflying game
Review Request: luola - A 2-4 player 2D caveflying game
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review (Show other bugs)
All Linux
unspecified Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it
Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
Depends On:
Blocks: FE-DEADREVIEW 817601 817602
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2012-04-30 11:22 EDT by inactive
Modified: 2016-02-08 09:08 EST (History)
5 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2015-08-21 05:41:52 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 inactive 2012-04-30 11:22:43 EDT
Spec URL: http://jor.netne.net/files/luola.spec
SRPM URL: http://jor.netne.net/files/luola-1.3.2-1.fc16.src.rpm
Description: Luola is a simple yet addictive arcade game where you fly a little V-shaped ship inside caverns and try to blow up other players.
It was inspired by V-Wing, an old Finnish caveflying game.
Comment 1 inactive 2012-04-30 11:23:03 EDT
I also packed the two available level sets:

Spec URL: http://jor.netne.net/files/luola-stdlevels.spec
SRPM URL: http://jor.netne.net/files/luola-stdlevels-6.0-1.fc16.src.rpm

Spec URL: http://jor.netne.net/files/luola-nostalgia.spec
SRPM URL: http://jor.netne.net/files/luola-nostalgia-1.2-1.fc16.src.rpm
Comment 2 Rex Dieter 2012-04-30 11:26:50 EDT
one pkg per review please (ie, submit the new level pkgs separately)
Comment 4 Susi Lehtola 2012-05-03 07:00:50 EDT
Explicit library requires are forbidden. Drop them.


 cp %{_sourcedir}/%{name}.6.gz %{_builddir}
This should read
 cp -p %{SOURCE1} .


echo -e "8c8\n< Icon=luola.png\n---\n> Icon=luola" | patch luola.desktop -

If you are patching, please create a proper patch.


Please use the -p flag with install, so that time stamps are preserved.


install -D %{name}.desktop %{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/applications/%{name}.desktop -m 0644

This is wrong. You need to use desktop-file-install (or desktop-file-validate).


Are you a member of the packagers group?
Comment 5 inactive 2012-05-03 15:06:21 EDT
Thank you very much. I think I fixed all your points, I updated the files.

I'm not member of the packagers group (yet).
Comment 6 Susi Lehtola 2012-05-03 15:17:48 EDT
OK. As it happens, I'm a sponsor and I am willing to sponsor you if you show me your knowing of the Fedora guidelines, most importantly
In addition to the Packaging Guidelines, there are a bunch of language / application specific guidelines that are linked to in the Packaging Guidelines.

Here are some tricks of the trade:

I will sponsor you if you have at least one other submission and perform a couple of informal reviews of packages of other people.

Please review only packages *not* marked with FE-NEEDSPONSOR. I will have to do the full formal review after you to check that you have got everything correctly. Once I have sponsored you you will be able to do formal reviews of your own.
Comment 7 inactive 2012-08-27 15:42:08 EDT
Thank you. I'd like to be sponsored by you. By now, I added one more package and one informal review (is the style ok?).
Package: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=818991
Review: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=845769#c2
Comment 8 Susi Lehtola 2012-08-29 09:26:44 EDT
Hold your horses. You were missing for almost four months, what was the reason?

The informal review is not ok, it's supposed to be a full fledged review - it's only called informal because you don't have the right to approve reviews just yet since you're not a packager. A proper review is such as the one Mikolaj Izdebski did in bug #845769.

And we're not that picky about spellings in Fedora - if it's proper, understandable English, it's OK. So no need to fuss about color/colour, meter/metre and so on.

Please perform two fully fledged informal reviews. I'll have a look at the package soon.
Comment 9 Jason Tibbitts 2012-08-30 13:06:53 EDT
Not to be a pain, but: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Summary_and_description

Please put personal preferences aside and use American English spelling in the summary and description. Packages can contain additional translated summary/description for supported Non-English languages, if available.
Comment 10 Susi Lehtola 2012-08-30 13:47:11 EDT
(In reply to comment #9)
> Not to be a pain, but:
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Summary_and_description
> "Please put personal preferences aside and use American English spelling in
> the summary and description. Packages can contain additional translated
> summary/description for supported Non-English languages, if available."

Still, the statement is rather mild (a SHOULD, not a MUST). If the rule really was reinforced, there'd be a lot more language policing around. I'd spend my resources on improving the summaries and descriptions that are found lacking or are in broken English.
Comment 11 Jason Tibbitts 2013-05-01 22:07:34 EDT
I am triaging old review tickets.  I can't promise a review if you reply, but by closing out the stale tickets we can devote extra attention to the ones which aren't stale.

This fails to build for me.  Here is a scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5323253
Comment 12 Miroslav Suchý 2015-07-21 09:37:50 EDT
Ping! Are you still interrested in this review?
Comment 13 Miroslav Suchý 2015-08-21 05:41:52 EDT
No response. Closing. Feel free to reopen if you want to continue.

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