Bugzilla (bugzilla.redhat.com) will be under maintenance for infrastructure upgrades and will not be available on July 31st between 12:30 AM - 05:30 AM UTC. We appreciate your understanding and patience. You can follow status.redhat.com for details.
Bug 817597 - Review Request: luola - A 2-4 player 2D caveflying game
Summary: Review Request: luola - A 2-4 player 2D caveflying game
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL: http://www.luolamies.org/software/luola
Depends On:
Blocks: FE-DEADREVIEW 817601 817602
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2012-04-30 15:22 UTC by inactive
Modified: 2016-02-08 14:08 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2015-08-21 09:41:52 UTC
Type: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description inactive 2012-04-30 15:22:43 UTC
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 15:23:03 UTC
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 15:26:50 UTC
one pkg per review please (ie, submit the new level pkgs separately)

Comment 4 Susi Lehtola 2012-05-03 11:00:50 UTC
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 19:06:21 UTC
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 19:17:48 UTC
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 19:42:08 UTC
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 13:26:44 UTC
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 17:06:53 UTC
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 17:47:11 UTC
(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 2013-05-02 02:07:34 UTC
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 13:37:50 UTC
Ping! Are you still interrested in this review?

Comment 13 Miroslav Suchý 2015-08-21 09:41:52 UTC
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.