[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
