[Bug 1907238] Review Request: openexr - Provides the specification and reference implementation of the EXR file format
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1907238 Tom Hughes changed: What|Removed |Added CC||t...@compton.nu --- Comment #10 from Tom Hughes --- I'm not sure why Josef retracted his comment because it this does indeed appear to be a duplicate of the existing OpenEXR package and even if it wasn't the same software packages whose names differ only in case are not allowed: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Naming/#_conflicting_package_names If the intention was to retire OpenEXR in favour of this then that does not appear to have happened as both are still live currently: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/OpenEXR https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/openexr -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1907238] Review Request: openexr - Provides the specification and reference implementation of the EXR file format
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1907238 Josef Ridky changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jri...@redhat.com Flags||needinfo?(hobbes1069@gmail. ||com) --- Comment #8 from Josef Ridky --- Is there any difference between your package and https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/OpenEXR, which is in Fedora for 3+ years? (and not counting, this version has newer NVR) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1907238] Review Request: openexr - Provides the specification and reference implementation of the EXR file format
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1907238 --- Comment #6 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/openexr -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1907238] Review Request: openexr - Provides the specification and reference implementation of the EXR file format
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1907238 --- Comment #5 from Richard Shaw --- (In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #3) > > Description: > > OpenEXR is a project of the [Academy Software > > Foundation](https://www.aswf.io). > > The format and library were originally developed by Industrial Light & Magic > > and first released in 2003. Weta Digital, Walt Disney Animation Studios, > > Sony > > Pictures Imageworks, Pixar Animation Studios, DreamWorks, and other studios, > > companies, and individuals have made contributions to the code base. > > Description + Summary don't actually say what this package and the format > are *for* > (images, video, something else?). Not everybody knows what "EXR" means. Also, > I think the blurb about authors is not interesting for users. Yeah, I copied that and a lot more from the README. I may borrow from the current OpenEXR package. > > %{_bindir}/* > Maybe '%{_bindir}/exr*' ? This will make it less likely to something > unintended to slip in on upgrades. > > rpmlint: > openexr.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US containes -> contained, > contains, containers Since I copied it straight from their readme I guess I should let them know :) > > # Is it OK to dump the libraries in site-packages? > It means that the modules 'iex' and 'imath' will be importable in the global > namespace. > It's certainly allowed in general. I think the name is a bit generic in this > case, but > it's not something we have influence over. Most dedicated python packages that I maintain put them in a named subdirectory but yeah, I looked in my system and there's lots of packages that dump them right in site-packages. > + license is acceptable for Fedora (BSD 3 clause) > + license is specified correctly > + builds and installs OK > + BR and Requires look correct > + Provides and Obsoletes look correct took > > Package is APPROVED. Thanks! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org