[Bug 708765] Review Request: frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|frogr-0.6.1-1.fc15  |frogr-0.6.1-1.fc16

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #89 from Fedora Update System  
2011-09-30 14:40:39 EDT ---
frogr-0.6.1-1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #88 from Fedora Update System  
2011-09-14 18:24:57 EDT ---
frogr-0.6.1-1.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
   Fixed In Version||frogr-0.6.1-1.fc15
 Resolution||ERRATA
Last Closed||2011-09-14 18:25:08

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA

--- Comment #87 from Fedora Update System  
2011-08-28 01:41:45 EDT ---
frogr-0.6.1-1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 testing repository.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #86 from Fedora Update System  
2011-08-27 15:37:04 EDT ---
frogr-0.6.1-1.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/frogr-0.6.1-1.fc15

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #85 from Fedora Update System  
2011-08-27 15:36:54 EDT ---
frogr-0.6.1-1.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/frogr-0.6.1-1.fc16

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #84 from Jon Ciesla  2011-08-26 05:50:22 EDT ---
Git done (by process-git-requests).

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

Mario Blättermann  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-cvs?

--- Comment #83 from Mario Blättermann  2011-08-25 16:32:49 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #82)
> Subject is capitalized, request is not, please make both the desired name.

Thanks for the hint. Subject is now not capitalized, as usual, because the
tarball is not capitalized, too.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

Mario Blättermann  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|Review Request: Frogr - |Review Request: frogr -
   |Flickr Remote Organizer for |Flickr Remote Organizer for
   |GNOME   |GNOME

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #82 from Jon Ciesla  2011-08-25 16:11:02 EDT ---
Subject is capitalized, request is not, please make both the desired name. 
Thanks!

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

Mario Blättermann  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-cvs?

--- Comment #81 from Mario Blättermann  2011-08-25 14:05:32 
EDT ---
New Package SCM Request
===
Package Name: frogr
Short Description: Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME
Owners: mariobl
Branches: f15 f16
InitialCC:

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #80 from Mario Blättermann  2011-08-25 14:01:19 
EDT ---
Many thanks for your review!

(In reply to comment #78)
> The Source0 URL is not good for the 0.6.1 release (check it out running
> "spectool -g frogr.spec"), you'll need to hardcode 0.6 instead of %{version} 
> to
> fix it.
>
Yes, has been fixed. First I thought it would be fine to define a macro such as
"%global baseversion 0.6", but I don't expect a lot of bugfix releases from the
0.6 branch.
> Strictly speaking, since you install docs in /usr/share/gnome/help you should
> either own that directory or require the packaging owning it (yelp), but I
> found a thread in fedora-packaging where it seems it's ok to leave it this 
> way.
> 
> Ideally, frogr could be improved to print the error returned by the GNOME API
> when yelp is not available.
>
A task for Mario Sanchez Prada (CC'ed anyway). But as far as I know, there
should already be an error message if Yelp hasn't been found.
> So, this package is APPROVED, but please be sure to fix the Source0 URL before
> importing it.

I will import this spec:
Spec URL: http://mariobl.fedorapeople.org/Review/SPECS/frogr.spec

(In reply to comment #79)
> A quick note: 
> %{_datadir}/%{name} is still unowned (see comment #19).

I've removed the asterisk from the appropriate line in %files.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #79 from Martin Gieseking  2011-08-25 
11:24:15 EDT ---
A quick note: 
%{_datadir}/%{name} is still unowned (see comment #19).

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

Gianluca Sforna  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+

--- Comment #78 from Gianluca Sforna  2011-08-25 11:08:31 EDT 
---
Ok, here is the review:

- package named according to package naming guidelines
- spec filename matches %{name}
- package licensed with open source compatible license (GPLv3)
- license matches actual license
- license file included in %doc
- spec written in American english
- spec legible
- source matches upstream e6a86c71599561f41cfd7d71f56dcd9f  frogr-0.6.1.tar.xz
- successfully builds in mock for F15 x86_64
- macro usage is consistent
- package contains code
- no large documentation
- correctly installs a .desktop file

Just a couple comments.

The Source0 URL is not good for the 0.6.1 release (check it out running
"spectool -g frogr.spec"), you'll need to hardcode 0.6 instead of %{version} to
fix it.

Strictly speaking, since you install docs in /usr/share/gnome/help you should
either own that directory or require the packaging owning it (yelp), but I
found a thread in fedora-packaging where it seems it's ok to leave it this way.

Ideally, frogr could be improved to print the error returned by the GNOME API
when yelp is not available.

So, this package is APPROVED, but please be sure to fix the Source0 URL before
importing it.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #77 from Mario Blättermann  2011-08-20 03:14:19 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #76)
> Here comes the 0.6.1 release:
> 
And here comes the new package:

Spec URL: http://mariobl.fedorapeople.org/Review/SPECS/frogr.spec
SRPM URL:
http://mariobl.fedorapeople.org/Review/SRPMS/frogr-0.6.1-1.fc15.src.rpm

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #76 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-08-19 
10:40:43 EDT ---
Here comes the 0.6.1 release:

 - The announcement (sent also to gnome-announce-list, still pending on
moderation):
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/frogr-list/2011-August/msg2.html

 - The tarballs:
http://download.gnome.org/sources/frogr/0.6/frogr-0.6.1.tar.xz  (2.08M)
  sha256sum:
06d9ec7447495bb3d1572f7ad39b6f25bd4f40d35c03f73ea4b62cbb204972e1

http://download.gnome.org/sources/frogr/0.6/frogr-0.6.1.tar.bz2 (2.16M)
  sha256sum:
2ef99647d07f2c5236cb5101a130712f312d33aad14cfc651aa198f8b67e0d2b

Hope this time is for real! :-)

Thanks

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #75 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-08-18 
11:44:53 EDT ---
As you wish, but as I said, I think it's very likely that I release the 0.6.1
during today or tomorrow (I found some kind beta testers who will help me
trying it :-)), so keep that in mind in case you finally prefer to wait a day
more or so.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #74 from Gianluca Sforna  2011-08-18 11:20:23 EDT 
---
Once in the repositories, the package can be updated a number of times during
the lifetime of each Fedora release so no, the memory leak is not a problem for
the review. I'll try to finalize it as soon as possible.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #73 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-08-18 
08:44:31 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #72)
> [...]
> If »soon« means within a week or two, I would wait with packaging. The "new
> package" policy in Fedora allows me to add a package during the whole
> distribution forming process. However, the package could remain in the testing
> repository somewhat longer, but it would be available anyway. In my mind, it 
> is
> better to have as less patches as possible. Let's wait for 0.6.1.

In this specific case, I'm afraid soon means "really soon", like in "this
week", which was my original idea when I wrote that comment, but even perhaps
during today or tomorrow, if I manage to get some time.

Since it's a bugfixing release, and the number of patches to include is fairly
small, not much additional testing will be needed, nor the usual additional
steps that use to take more time when doing a normal release, so let's be
optimist :-)

Thanks for understanding,
Mario

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #72 from Mario Blättermann  2011-08-18 08:18:01 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #71)
> So, I'll probably release 0.6.1 soon, including that patch and some others 
> less
> important (but important anyway) bugs detected after the release. In summary,
> the patches I'd be applying, unless some other sever bugs show up, would be:
> 
>   - fix a HUGE memory leak loading pixbufs in details window
>   - more mem leaks fixed by Christophe Fergeau
>   - a segfault in systems using GTK < 2.24
>   - some problems in the Mac version (can't authorize)
> 
> Not sure whether this impacts or not packaging frogr for fedora, but just
> telling you in case you prefer to wait for the new bugfixing release.

If »soon« means within a week or two, I would wait with packaging. The "new
package" policy in Fedora allows me to add a package during the whole
distribution forming process. However, the package could remain in the testing
repository somewhat longer, but it would be available anyway. In my mind, it is
better to have as less patches as possible. Let's wait for 0.6.1.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #71 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-08-18 
07:03:30 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #70)
> Sorry for the noise, the bug was in my own system, see
> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=656688#c2. All is OK now, please go
> ahead with reviewing.

That's great. However, and in order to perpetuate the bad luck I'm having with
this tiny app :(, I think I will need to rollout a 0.6.1 bugfix release anyway,
since I found a HUGE memory leak that is causing frogr to waste quite a lot of
memory whenever the user opens the details dialog (a pretty common operation).

So, I'll probably release 0.6.1 soon, including that patch and some others less
important (but important anyway) bugs detected after the release. In summary,
the patches I'd be applying, unless some other sever bugs show up, would be:

  - fix a HUGE memory leak loading pixbufs in details window
  - more mem leaks fixed by Christophe Fergeau
  - a segfault in systems using GTK < 2.24
  - some problems in the Mac version (can't authorize)

Not sure whether this impacts or not packaging frogr for fedora, but just
telling you in case you prefer to wait for the new bugfixing release.

Thanks and sorry for the mess,
Mario

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #70 from Mario Blättermann  2011-08-18 06:19:13 
EDT ---
Sorry for the noise, the bug was in my own system, see
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=656688#c2. All is OK now, please go
ahead with reviewing.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #69 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-08-16 
17:32:48 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #68)
> Small problems with 0.6:
> 
> The info panel shows "0.6~unreleased". Just a cosmetic issue, but moreover, 
> the
> help files are partially in English, although I had tweaked the German
> translation before v0.6 was released. Perhaps we get a 0.6.1 release.

This is very strange. I already commented in the bug you reported in GNOME's
bugzilla, about it. Please see my comments in there:

https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=656688#c1

I'm afraid you'r using the wrong source code, but can't figure out why...

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

Mario Blättermann  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

External Bug ID||GNOME Desktop 656688

--- Comment #68 from Mario Blättermann  2011-08-16 15:04:18 
EDT ---
Small problems with 0.6:

The info panel shows "0.6~unreleased". Just a cosmetic issue, but moreover, the
help files are partially in English, although I had tweaked the German
translation before v0.6 was released. Perhaps we get a 0.6.1 release.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #67 from Mario Blättermann  2011-08-16 14:40:58 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #66)
> Alberto Garcia is correct.  All the patches in the current package is just not
> needed at all

Yes, of course I've dropped all the patches because they came from the Git
anyway. Here are the new files (with some delay, don't hit me):

Spec URL: http://mariobl.fedorapeople.org/Review/SPECS/frogr.spec
SRPM URL: http://mariobl.fedorapeople.org/Review/SRPMS/frogr-0.6-1.fc15.src.rpm

Koji scratch build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3276949

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #66 from Rahul Sundaram  2011-08-16 11:54:05 
EDT ---
Alberto Garcia is correct.  All the patches in the current package is just not
needed at all

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

Alberto Garcia  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||agar...@igalia.com

--- Comment #65 from Alberto Garcia  2011-08-16 09:52:13 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #38)
> Of course it's possible to keep the separate license but then you
> have to explain why an integral part of frogr not intended to be
> used externally needs its own license.

My 2 cents:

My understanding of all this "No Bundled Libraries" rule is that in
general you want to avoid packaging a piece of software that includes
an external library in its source tree, for all the reasons explained
in the Fedora wiki page.

That looks like a sensible rule to me, but it's certainly not what
happens here. Apart from having two different licenses, none of the
problems detailed in the aforementioned wiki page apply to
Frogr/Flicksoup.

Flicksoup is not an external library, it's not being released
separately, there are no official tarballs and doesn't have a separate
upstream repository. It's not bundled with Frogr: it's an internal
part of it, much like mpglib was an internal part of mpg123 for a
decade or so.

I don't think that the fact that those files are released under a
different license makes any difference in this case.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #64 from Gianluca Sforna  2011-08-16 09:49:40 EDT 
---
For the records, I tried to rebuild in mock the latest version and it seems ok,
no workarounds needed

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #63 from Alberto Garcia  2011-08-16 09:09:30 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #58)
> I think in debian they used the workaround of ensuring that the m4
> directory existed prior to that. Not sure if that could be applied
> here as well.

If you change configure.ac, 'make' will try to regenerate aclocal.m4
among others, and that will fail if there's no m4 directory.

That happens in general if configure.ac is newer than aclocal.m4, so
you might also run into that problem if the files are unmodified but
their timestamps are wrong (e.g. if you are not using the original
upstream tarball).

So, summarizing: if you need to regenerate aclocal.m4, make sure that
the m4 directory exists.

I'm not using any workaround in Debian since I'm not patching
configure.ac or any other autotools file.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

Rahul Sundaram  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||methe...@gmail.com

--- Comment #62 from Rahul Sundaram  2011-08-16 08:57:17 
EDT ---
Mario Blättermann,  Are you going to bump up the spec to the newer version for
review?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #61 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-08-13 
05:08:25 EDT ---
Frogr 0.6 has been released today. Feel free to package it for Fedora and/or
ask me for whatever you might need from me to help with the task.

 - The announcement (sent also to gnome-announce-list, still pending on
moderation):
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/frogr-list/2011-August/msg1.html

 - The tarballs:
http://download.gnome.org/sources/frogr/0.6/frogr-0.6.tar.xz  (2.08M)
  sha256sum: 1934b4ec738af0a27f334d753496e97659ba4e9317ad17e03d6f578152784d04

http://download.gnome.org/sources/frogr/0.6/frogr-0.6.tar.bz2 (2.16M)
  sha256sum: ca2b3ff4c1d20555815b29d97b0c404a06a6d37b680218bda9c1f8e70699857c

 - The frogr.spec file I'm currently using to manually build FC15 64 bit
packages (just in case it helps):
http://git.gnome.org/browse/frogr/tree/frogr.spec

Thanks!

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #60 from Christophe Fergeau  2011-07-19 
07:59:22 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #59)

> 
> After all, the new release of frogr should happen anytime soon (August?), so 
> no
> need to rush things, IMHO

If you want to make sure the package is available in F16, make sure you'll
still be on schedule even if you wait ( http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Schedule
).
I won't comment on when at the latest the package has to ready to be available
in f16 since I'm not familiar enough with fedora release process to know :)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #59 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-07-19 
06:41:00 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #57)
> (In reply to comment #56)
> > If you patch configure.ac or Makefile.am, you should add an autoreconf -fi
> > before %configure in %prep
> 
> Doesn't work, same error message. Due to the fact that all the patches are
> taken from Git, I should either use the Git content directly as source, or I
> should wait until frogr-0.6 has been released.

JFTR, Berto (debian package maintainer for frogr) just told me now that it's a
problem with the timestamp of some files. Using the published tarball should
fix the issue, but that's not possible since some patches must be applied
anyway so I agree waiting for frogr 0.6 is the best way to go. 

After all, the new release of frogr should happen anytime soon (August?), so no
need to rush things, IMHO

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #58 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-07-04 
15:20:43 EDT ---
I think in debian they used the workaround of ensuring that the m4 directory
existed prior to that. Not sure if that could be applied here as well. 

Also, if you have some specific suggestion for integrating upstream I'll be
glad to push it if that helps :)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #57 from Mario Blättermann  2011-07-04 14:49:15 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #56)
> If you patch configure.ac or Makefile.am, you should add an autoreconf -fi
> before %configure in %prep

Doesn't work, same error message. Due to the fact that all the patches are
taken from Git, I should either use the Git content directly as source, or I
should wait until frogr-0.6 has been released.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #56 from Christophe Fergeau  2011-07-04 
04:31:27 EDT ---
If you patch configure.ac or Makefile.am, you should add an autoreconf -fi
before %configure in %prep

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #55 from Mario Blättermann  2011-07-03 11:09:23 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #54)
> Few fixes to do:
> 
> 1. Missing a BR for intltool
Added.
> 2. debuginfo package is missing sources because of the "-g0" CFLAG hardcoded 
> in
> configure.ac; upstream should just omit it and things will not change for
> manual builds, while allowing our "-g" override. I used a trivial patch on
> configure to achieve this
> 3. rplint claims there's another incorrect FSF address in
> /usr/src/debug/frogr-0.5/src/flicksoup/fsp-session.c
> 4. there is a trailing ',' on the gtk3-devel BR line. You may want to remove
> it, and possibly also the "> version" thing, as F15 has the correct versions.
Dropped the version numbers.

I've applied some patches from comment #47. No I get the following error:

+ make -j3
CDPATH="${ZSH_VERSION+.}:" && cd . && /bin/sh
/home/mariobl/rpmbuild/BUILD/frogr-0.5/missing --run aclocal-1.11 -I m4
aclocal-1.11: couldn't open directory `m4': No such file or directory
make: *** [aclocal.m4] Error 1

Files:
Spec URL: http://mariobl.fedorapeople.org/Review/SPECS/frogr.spec
SRPM URL: http://mariobl.fedorapeople.org/Review/SRPMS/frogr-0.5-4.fc15.src.rpm

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #54 from Gianluca Sforna  2011-07-01 07:05:55 EDT 
---
Few fixes to do:

1. Missing a BR for intltool
2. debuginfo package is missing sources because of the "-g0" CFLAG hardcoded in
configure.ac; upstream should just omit it and things will not change for
manual builds, while allowing our "-g" override. I used a trivial patch on
configure to achieve this
3. rplint claims there's another incorrect FSF address in
/usr/src/debug/frogr-0.5/src/flicksoup/fsp-session.c
4. there is a trailing ',' on the gtk3-devel BR line. You may want to remove
it, and possibly also the "> version" thing, as F15 has the correct versions.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

Gianluca Sforna  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|gia...@gmail.com
   Flag||fedora-review?

--- Comment #53 from Gianluca Sforna  2011-06-30 04:14:16 EDT 
---
Ok, taking the review, will probably work on this in the evening

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #52 from Martin Gieseking  2011-06-29 
13:50:33 EDT ---
Since the reviewing process seems to have stalled, I asked Toshio Kuratomi (a
member of the FPC) how to continue with the package. He agreed to go on without
requesting a bundled library exception. The library may also be linked
statically as long as no third-party project uses it. Once someone submits a
package in the future that depends on flicksoup (despite upstream's decision to
keep it private), we have to revisit Frogr too, and split out flicksoup to a
separate (sub-)package.

So, sorry for having been a bit overcautious. If there's anybody who wants to
take the review, he/she can continue without further hassle. :)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #51 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-06-29 
05:41:59 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #50)
> I can't find any FPC request on their trac instance.
> 
> Anyway, if the library is internal to the project I don't really see any issue
> for approving the package. For me, "internal" means it's not intended for
> external use, so for instance there are no header files installed by "make
> install" that would be used by a 3rd party user.

Exactly. No header files at all will be installed in the system when you
install frogr, they will remain internal to the project and will only be used
when compiling frogr.

Thanks for the feedback

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

Gianluca Sforna  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||gia...@gmail.com

--- Comment #50 from Gianluca Sforna  2011-06-29 04:03:39 EDT 
---
I can't find any FPC request on their trac instance.

Anyway, if the library is internal to the project I don't really see any issue
for approving the package. For me, "internal" means it's not intended for
external use, so for instance there are no header files installed by "make
install" that would be used by a 3rd party user.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #49 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-06-09 
07:02:30 EDT ---
Just wondering... is there any place where I can follow the status of this
request to the FPC? I found this site, but I'm not sure that's the place to
follow it: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/report/1

If there's anything else I can do from my side to help, just let me know.

Thanks!

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #48 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-06-04 
02:39:57 EDT ---
Created attachment 502955
  --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=502955
Additional patches that might be interesting to apply

You (fedora packagers) might also find interesting applying two additional
patches that also are being applied specifically in the debian package:

  0001-Fix-segfault-when-no-valid-uris-are-passed-via-comma.patch
  0002-Updated-manpage-to-use-uri-instead-of-path.patch

Those are not strictly needed, but good to have.

The first one is about fixing a segfault in the _very unlikely_ case the user
runs frogr from command line with wrong arguments (currently frogr only
supports URIs to files as arguments, so even frogr --help will segfault. Yes,
sad but true). The command line arguments are not intented to be used directly
by the user but we need that frogr supports that in order to properly act as a
handler for picture mimetypes, so you can "right click" on a picture in
nautilus/eog/... and "Open with frogr...".

The second one is about updating the manpage, which should say "uri" instead of
"path" after the following patch was applied for frogr 0.5:

http://git.gnome.org/browse/frogr/commit/?id=42196942bc467e7e97e69e5b06cddea3e8f2a6f7

About debian packages already bundling these two patches, here you have the
mail were frogr 0.5-1 was accepted, where you can see them:

http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-changes/2011/05/msg02377.html

Now it's for real... have a nice weekend!

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #47 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-06-03 
18:33:51 EDT ---
Created attachment 502924
  --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=502924
Patches to be applied over frogr 0.5 for packaging

(In reply to comment #45)
> [...]
> I'm ok with that, but if it's ok to you, I'd like to help you by providing
> those specific patches to you in an organized way, after having squashed all
> those little commits I've been pushing lately, so handling them while 
> packaging
> would not be a mess.
> 
> That way I would provide Fedora packagers a very easy way to package frogr in 
> a
> Fedora compliant way.

I'll be away of a laptop during all the weekend and I don't know if someone
would like to do some work in the meanwhile about this... so now attaching a
tar.gz file with all the patches that would need to be applied to frogr 0.5
release according this conversation, and taking into account that flicksoup
files are being built again as an static file (see comment #46).

At the end the relevant patches are less and simpler than what I thought at
first:

  0001-Do-not-set-Wall-g0-and-02-flags-in-release-builds.patch
  0002-Updated-FSF-address-in-source-headers.patch
  0003-Added-Lesser-to-source-headers-where-missing.patch
  0004-Changed-wording-in-the-license-about-flicksoup.patch
  0005-Changed-wording-about-flicksoup-in-README-file.patch
  0006-Added-LGPLv3-COPYING-file-under-src-flicksoup-and-up.patch

Hope this helps to packagers this time. For the next release it wouldn't be
needed as all of them are already integrated upstream in master.

Have a nice weekend, and lots of thanks for the incredible feedback so far.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #46 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-06-03 
17:38:51 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #39)
> (In reply to comment #38)
[...]
> > No, sorry for the confusion. Linking object files directly or putting them 
> > in a
> > static library and link the .a file doesn't make a big difference.
> 
> Ok, got it. I'll probably get it back to the original situation at some point
> then.

Done, back to the origin (and sorry for the ping pong)

http://git.gnome.org/browse/frogr/commit/?id=b7b668cb303f3cc4b87276b14fc983bdc8a7f8ec

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #45 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-06-03 
17:09:04 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #40)
> [...]
> What does it mean for the technical side of the package? My idea is to use the
> recent Git commits as patches to make the debug file creation work. Then we
> could go ahead with Frogr itself. Once a day we have a separate library, then
> it is time to roll up the process again. For now, we should concentrate the
> effort to v0.5, even with patches, of course.

I'm ok with that, but if it's ok to you, I'd like to help you by providing
those specific patches to you in an organized way, after having squashed all
those little commits I've been pushing lately, so handling them while packaging
would not be a mess.

That way I would provide Fedora packagers a very easy way to package frogr in a
Fedora compliant way.

I propose this becase after so many (small) changes since the 0.5 release, I'm
afraid just picking patches and applying them on the fly while packaging could
be not that easy for someone not familiar with the project (that is me), 

What do you think?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #44 from Christophe Fergeau  2011-06-03 
15:56:34 EDT ---
I'm fine with asking the FPC people, it just sounds like unnecessary red tape
to me. The reason for the "no bundled library" rule is to make sure every
library user uses the same version installed as a shared library since it makes
security fixes and bug fixes much easier. Given that upstream doesn't want
flicksoup to be used/packaged as a separate library and that frogr is the only
user, my position is that it's not a bundled library, just an internal detail
of frogr build system.

But yeah, let's ask FPC if it's the way to go.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #43 from Martin Gieseking  2011-06-03 
15:39:41 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #42)
> These are some C files that are licensed differently because they are generic
> enough to be useful outside of this project, I'm not sure where you are seeing
> a library here.

Yes, generic files in a separate folder with the name of a former library.
There are still many websites with references to flicksoup as a library. You
even find it packaged separately on a cygwin site. I don't want to argue here.
I just suggest to ensure that we provide a package that conforms the guidelines
and that the latest changes are sufficient. So where's the problem to simply
ask the FPC people? But if you think it's not necessary, then please continue.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #42 from Christophe Fergeau  2011-06-03 
15:06:54 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #41)
> Yes, you should ask for an exception to ensure that the library hasn't to be
> packaged separately. It's still a bundled library with its own licensing.

These are some C files that are licensed differently because they are generic
enough to be useful outside of this project, I'm not sure where you are seeing
a library here.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #41 from Martin Gieseking  2011-06-03 
14:45:27 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #40)
> In any case, I would prefer a proper way for the time being. As the Gitorious
> repo has been crowded, it is no longer needed to ask for a "bundled library"
> exception, because there's no library anymore outside there.

Yes, you should ask for an exception to ensure that the library hasn't to be
packaged separately. It's still a bundled library with its own licensing.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #40 from Mario Blättermann  2011-06-03 14:12:45 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #39)
> > The question is: Do we have a library that could be used outside the 
> > project (and is
> > promoted a s such) or is it just a module exclusively related to the main
> > project.
> 
> After recent events, I'd say now the answer is simple: no, we do not have such
> a library that could be used outside the project yet.
> 
In any case, I would prefer a proper way for the time being. As the Gitorious
repo has been crowded, it is no longer needed to ask for a "bundled library"
exception, because there's no library anymore outside there.

What does it mean for the technical side of the package? My idea is to use the
recent Git commits as patches to make the debug file creation work. Then we
could go ahead with Frogr itself. Once a day we have a separate library, then
it is time to roll up the process again. For now, we should concentrate the
effort to v0.5, even with patches, of course.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #39 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-06-03 
13:26:22 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #38)
> (In reply to comment #35)
> > Here I disagree, LGPLv3 licensed code can be used as if it was licensed 
> > under
> > the GPLv3, so no compatibility issues as far as I know, and if external
> > contributions are made to this code, relicensing from GPLv3 to LGPLv3 will 
> > be
> > annoying (ie need to contribute everyone to get their agreement). So I don't
> > really see a compelling reason to do the relicensing.
> 
> 
> Of course it's possible to keep the separate license but then you have to
> explain why an integral part of frogr not intended to be used externally needs
> its own license. If everything goes into an application licensed under GPLv3,
> why do you need LGPLv3 code in a separate directory? This just looks like a
> project bundled with the tarball. But that's only my humble opinion. Let's FPC
> have a look at this. Mario B. would you ask for a bundled library exception?

Yeah, I understand. That's why I added a "Note: " in the README
file, because the truth is that I hope at some poing to have some time to
devote to make it a library (or that someone else step in and do it :-)).
Thinking that way, it makes a lot of sense to me to license those files as
LGPL.

> (In reply to comment #36)
> > Ok, it's obvious then (as per your comment and Christophe's) that I
> > misunderstood you in the first comments: I though having a .a file was 
> > actually an issue
> 
> No, sorry for the confusion. Linking object files directly or putting them in 
> a
> static library and link the .a file doesn't make a big difference.

Ok, got it. I'll probably get it back to the original situation at some point
then.

> The question is: Do we have a library that could be used outside the project 
> (and is
> promoted a s such) or is it just a module exclusively related to the main
> project.

After recent events, I'd say now the answer is simple: no, we do not have such
a library that could be used outside the project yet.

What I'll probably do in the future, unless someone else do it first, is to
wait till frogr being stable and feature complete enough so I can forget about
releasing new versions for some time, then focusing on starting my "evil plan":

  1. Take the flicksoup files out of frogr and release them as an independent
library.
  2. Try to convince people out there to package that library, so I can further
safely make frogr depend on it for future releases, (at least in those distros
already packaging frogr).
  3. Make the next release of frogr depend on that library, removing all the
files under src/flicksoup
  4. Release new version frogr depending on flicksoup, finally.

How does it sound? 

Keep in mind that my "evil plan" could take months to materialize, perhaps when
my second child is born (late August 2011) it could be a good moment to think
about it. Why? well, if you think that I started frogr right when my first son
was born, you could understand it would make sense to me to do something
similar with flicksoup when the second one comes to life... kind of my
"personal way of welcoming my sons to the world of FS", right since their most
early days" :-)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #38 from Martin Gieseking  2011-06-03 
11:38:30 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #35)
> Here I disagree, LGPLv3 licensed code can be used as if it was licensed under
> the GPLv3, so no compatibility issues as far as I know, and if external
> contributions are made to this code, relicensing from GPLv3 to LGPLv3 will be
> annoying (ie need to contribute everyone to get their agreement). So I don't
> really see a compelling reason to do the relicensing.


Of course it's possible to keep the separate license but then you have to
explain why an integral part of frogr not intended to be used externally needs
its own license. If everything goes into an application licensed under GPLv3,
why do you need LGPLv3 code in a separate directory? This just looks like a
project bundled with the tarball. But that's only my humble opinion. Let's FPC
have a look at this. Mario B. would you ask for a bundled library exception?



(In reply to comment #36)
> Ok, it's obvious then (as per your comment and Christophe's) that I
> misunderstood you in the first comments: I though having a .a file was 
> actually an issue

No, sorry for the confusion. Linking object files directly or putting them in a
static library and link the .a file doesn't make a big difference. The question
is: Do we have a library that could be used outside the project (and is
promoted a s such) or is it just a module exclusively related to the main
project.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #37 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-06-03 
11:32:15 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #36)
> [...]
> If putting a COPYING file inside src/flicksoup is good enough I'd go for this
> approach, instead of changing the license of flicksoup files to GPLv3 now.

http://git.gnome.org/browse/frogr/commit/?id=56616a73f0816ca4d22cedf5225671e76e655a06

:-)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #36 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-06-03 
11:07:21 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #34)
> I agree with Christophe that it shouldn't be a problem to build private static
> libraries and link them to the binary. As long as they are an exclusive part 
> of
> the project this should be fine. 

Ok, it's obvious then (as per your comment and Christophe's) that I
misunderstood you in the first comments: I though having a .a file was actually
an issue. I'll probably change it at some point back to how it was before. Now
that flicksoup is no longer published independently, and that I've updated
references in wording inside frogr (and in live.gnome.org) that shouldn't be an
issue I guess.

> In order to emphasize flicksoup is an integral part of frogr and not intended
> to be used in third-party projects, I suggest to unify the source headers and
> release everything under GPLv3. Having differently licensed files might 
> require
> some explanation (and an additional COPYING file with the LGPL license text in
> src/flicksoup ;-)). You can change the license back to LGPLv3 -- or whatever
> license you prefer -- once flicksoup is ready to become a separate project.

If putting a COPYING file inside src/flicksoup is good enough I'd go for this
approach, instead of changing the license of flicksoup files to GPLv3 now.

Btw, not sure at this point whether it would be still needed that I release
0.5.1 to ease life of Fedora packagers. Perhaps it's already clear enough that
flicksoup is not maintained separately :-), otherwise just ping me, give me
some time (cause I did this just in spare time), and I'll try to do it asap.

Thanks!

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #35 from Christophe Fergeau  2011-06-03 
10:42:04 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #34)
>
> In order to emphasize flicksoup is an integral part of frogr and not intended
> to be used in third-party projects, I suggest to unify the source headers and
> release everything under GPLv3. Having differently licensed files might 
> require
> some explanation (and an additional COPYING file with the LGPL license text in
> src/flicksoup ;-)). You can change the license back to LGPLv3 -- or whatever
> license you prefer -- once flicksoup is ready to become a separate project.

Here I disagree, LGPLv3 licensed code can be used as if it was licensed under
the GPLv3, so no compatibility issues as far as I know, and if external
contributions are made to this code, relicensing from GPLv3 to LGPLv3 will be
annoying (ie need to contribute everyone to get their agreement). So I don't
really see a compelling reason to do the relicensing.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #34 from Martin Gieseking  2011-06-03 
10:22:36 EDT ---
I agree with Christophe that it shouldn't be a problem to build private static
libraries and link them to the binary. As long as they are an exclusive part of
the project this should be fine. 

In order to emphasize flicksoup is an integral part of frogr and not intended
to be used in third-party projects, I suggest to unify the source headers and
release everything under GPLv3. Having differently licensed files might require
some explanation (and an additional COPYING file with the LGPL license text in
src/flicksoup ;-)). You can change the license back to LGPLv3 -- or whatever
license you prefer -- once flicksoup is ready to become a separate project.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #33 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-06-03 
08:47:51 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #32)
> I'm not sure I'd have made this build system change to frogr :) There are
> plenty of projects building various helper libraries during the build, and 
> then
> linking everything together to generate the final binary. This is the most
> convenient way of having separate directories when doing recursive builds with
> automake, which was the norm until recently.

Well, I'm not an expert on this matters but as frogr is a small application and
not sure that this makes a big difference in terms of building it. However, if
that helps Fedora packagers to be happier, then I'll be happier too, knowing
that in the future the door to make flicksoup an independent library is still
open.

Anyway, reverting that commit is also a possibility in case we wanted to do it
so. For the time being, and to avoid too much ping-pong with this, I'll leave
it the way it is now: no libflicksoup.a file.

> What I'd do would be to remove libflickrsoup from gitorious and to insist that
> for now libflickrsoup is just an internal library private to frogr, which it
> is. The day you decide to make libflickrsoup an actual library that you want 
> to
> support, you should be able to generate a git repository with full history
> using git filter-branch.

Done, and also changed the description in live.gnome.org/Frogr not to mention
it.

Hope now the FPC believes me when I say flicksoup is not an independently
maintained library yet :-)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #32 from Christophe Fergeau  2011-06-03 
07:58:45 EDT ---
I'm not sure I'd have made this build system change to frogr :) There are
plenty of projects building various helper libraries during the build, and then
linking everything together to generate the final binary. This is the most
convenient way of having separate directories when doing recursive builds with
automake, which was the norm until recently.

What I'd do would be to remove libflickrsoup from gitorious and to insist that
for now libflickrsoup is just an internal library private to frogr, which it
is. The day you decide to make libflickrsoup an actual library that you want to
support, you should be able to generate a git repository with full history
using git filter-branch.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #31 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-06-02 
17:12:55 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #30)
> [...]
> > If the FPC doesn't grant an exception, this is probably the only 
> > alternative. 
> 
> If the Fedora Packaging Comitee granted that exception that would be awesome.
> As I said, I'm open to (temporarily at least) removing the git repository of
> flicksoup in gitorious, and I'm also open, if bundling a static library in
> frogr is a problem (as I understand from your words), to merge even more those
> files in src/fliksoup with frogr, so they would be compiled just through the
> same set of files in the SOURCES variable, in src/Makefile.am.
> 
> That way, there wouldn't be anymore a libflicksoup.a frogr would link against,
> just the source files as they are, avoiding the problems with Fedora 
> packaging,
> if I got it right.

I did this change upstream in frogr, you can check it out here:
http://git.gnome.org/browse/frogr/commit/?id=29baa0f75d8247c8769375c1a1e616c6cc81ddb5

Now there's no more a libflicksoup.la file, as all the fsp-*.[ch] files are
compiled as part of the frogr binary. Can somebody point out if in this
situation frogr would be more suitable to be packaged for Fedora? 

Also still not removed the flicksoup repo from gitorious, waiting for some
feedback from this thread on the topic, although I'm now more in the mood of
removing it than of keeping it :-)

> [...]
> But all this, when it comes to releasing frogr 0.5 in fedora, would mean that
> such an exception should be granted. Or well... if such an exception was not
> granted we could also release frogr 0.5.1 with those modifications in place, 
> in
> case you agree is a good idea

As I mentioned here, if releasing frogr 0.5.1 with these latest modifications
in place help in any way to Fedora packagers, I'll gladly do it so. Just ask.

> If this idea (remove the libflicksoup.a from frogr) was feasible, I'd say is
> the best way to go. And if keeping the flicksoup files inside of frogr with 
> the
> LGPLv3 license was not a problem for Fedora, then it would be perfect.

At the moment I kept the files in src/flicksoup/ as LGPLv3. Hope there's no
issue with that.

Last but not least, I've changed the wording about flicksoup inside the files
that were mentioning it inside frogr, to stop telling that is a "bundled
library", which is not yet.

Hope these changes help moving towards our goal :-)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #30 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-06-02 
11:17:19 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #29)
> [...]
> I think you could also package a Git snapshot of flicksoup and use it instead
> of the bundled library. In this case, all changes to the bundled library
> should of course be pushed to the flicksoup repo so that both source pools 
> are in sync and future updates work smoothly. 

Hmmm... the more I think about it the more I regret having started with
flicksoup as a separate thing in the first place. I should have started
everything together and split it later on, then we wouldn't have this problem
now... :/

Currently flicksoup files inside of frogr are not on sync with those in
gitorious (frogr's files are more recent) and they probably will change a
little bit more during the development of frogr 0.6, specially in those
functions related to proxy support.

> If the FPC doesn't grant an exception, this is probably the only alternative. 

If the Fedora Packaging Comitee granted that exception that would be awesome.
As I said, I'm open to (temporarily at least) removing the git repository of
flicksoup in gitorious, and I'm also open, if bundling a static library in
frogr is a problem (as I understand from your words), to merge even more those
files in src/fliksoup with frogr, so they would be compiled just through the
same set of files in the SOURCES variable, in src/Makefile.am.

That way, there wouldn't be anymore a libflicksoup.a frogr would link against,
just the source files as they are, avoiding the problems with Fedora packaging,
if I got it right.

In the future, if I (or anyone else) manage to get the right timespan to make
flicksoup an independent package out of frogr, we would just remove those files
and set the dependency.

But all this, when it comes to releasing frogr 0.5 in fedora, would mean that
such an exception should be granted. Or well... if such an exception was not
granted we could also release frogr 0.5.1 with those modifications in place, in
case you agree is a good idea

If this idea (remove the libflicksoup.a from frogr) was feasible, I'd say is
the best way to go. And if keeping the flicksoup files inside of frogr with the
LGPLv3 license was not a problem for Fedora, then it would be perfect.

> (In reply to comment #26)
> > if I released it
> > now, I couldn't promise I wouldn't break API/ABI in the next releases
> 
> That shouldn't be too much of a problem as long as you bump the soname and
> soversion accordingly.

Yeah, I know, but the problem is other... more related with me feeling
confident and comfortable enough to releasing  the library separately. And
because one reason of another the truth is that I still do not feel like it...

Btw, just in case you wonder, do not worry about me perhaps disliking the idea
of dropping the flicksoup repo from gitorious... actually that wouldn't be that
bad for me, since it would free me from the burden of having to keep two copies
of the same file set on sync, and I could always re-open it in the future when
I feel confident enough to propose flicksoup as an independent package :-).

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #29 from Martin Gieseking  2011-06-02 
10:28:36 EDT ---
I ask on IRC how to handle this issue and got some helpful information from Rex
Dieter. First of all, it's not possible to bundle the library "silently", i.e. 
FPC must grant an exception from the no-bundled-libraries policy. Mario (B.),
you should ask for such an exception as described here:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries#Exceptions 

I think you could also package a Git snapshot of flicksoup and use it instead
of the bundled library. In this case, all changes to the bundled library should
of course be pushed to the flicksoup repo so that both source pools are in sync
and future updates work smoothly. If the FPC doesn't grant an exception, this
is probably the only alternative. 


(In reply to comment #26)
> if I released it
> now, I couldn't promise I wouldn't break API/ABI in the next releases

That shouldn't be too much of a problem as long as you bump the soname and
soversion accordingly.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #28 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-06-02 
06:05:06 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #27)
> I would keep src/flicksoup files as LGPLv3 if your long term plan/hope is to
> ship it as a separate library. If you get external patches to src/flicksoup,
> you don't want to be stuck with GPLv3 licensing the day you want to make it an
> external library.

Yeah, I for sure would prefer not to touch the license, just putting options
over the table, not consider to go ahead with any of them yet.

> Apart from that, your plan makes sense to me. Another option might be to
> install flicksoup as a .so as part of flickr "make install", and to also
> install .h files. This way, the library can be put in separate lib/-devel
> subpackages. However, this is not a really good solution, since I'm under the
> impression that if someone tries to use it, things will break every time frogr
> gets upgraded.

Already though of that (actually at the beginning frogr used flicksoup in that
way), but if I'm shipping an application and not a library I think it's better
to build flicksoup files inside of it as a static object, as it's being done
now.

> I don't know if this is OK wrt fedora guidelines, but at least your plan 
> makes sense to me.

Glad to hear that. Hopefully only (A) will be needed (I do not like much (B)
and (C)) :-)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #27 from Christophe Fergeau  2011-06-02 
05:54:13 EDT ---
I would keep src/flicksoup files as LGPLv3 if your long term plan/hope is to
ship it as a separate library. If you get external patches to src/flicksoup,
you don't want to be stuck with GPLv3 licensing the day you want to make it an
external library.
Apart from that, your plan makes sense to me. Another option might be to
install flicksoup as a .so as part of flickr "make install", and to also
install .h files. This way, the library can be put in separate lib/-devel
subpackages. However, this is not a really good solution, since I'm under the
impression that if someone tries to use it, things will break every time frogr
gets upgraded.
I don't know if this is OK wrt fedora guidelines, but at least your plan makes
sense to me.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #26 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-06-02 
05:20:16 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #24)
> CFLAGS also defines some preprocessor constants (-DG_DISABLE_ASSERT
> -DG_DISABLE_CHECKS -DG_DISABLE_CAST_CHECKS) that probably have to be added 
> when
> overwriting CFLAGS in the make statement. I'm not sure if they are actually
> required, though.
> 
> Mario Sanchez Prada, since it's a bad idea to hard-code -g0 and -O2 in
> configure.ac, I suggest to remove them in the next release.

I did it because it was handy for me, but in the end what I do need for
development are the flags when debug mode is enabled. I actually don't care
much about those others in release mode, so I agree and have already removed
them for the next release:

http://git.gnome.org/browse/frogr/commit/?id=bb99f7443acd6d247e7494f4eced8d3635ec2c30

> Also, the source headers contain a wrong FSF address. It's recommended to use
> the wording mentioned in COPYING:
> You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
> along with this program.  If not, see .

Fixed in master:
http://git.gnome.org/browse/frogr/commit/?id=33573b2f8b9d8b261dbcba688a9d422e5a3f8a1f

> frogr seems to use the bundled library flicksoup (src/flicksoup) which is
> available at http://gitorious.org/flicksoup. This is not allowed in Fedora.
> The library must be packaged separately.
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries

Hmmm... we have an issue here, because that library is not mature yet to be
published independently, and without it frogr won't work, so we need to find a
solution for it if we want to ship frogr in Fedora.

But first, let me tell you why this situation of having frogr bundling a, in
theory, separate library:

I started developing flicksoup (yes, I also hold the authorship and copyright
over it) back in 2009 when frogr was still using flickcurl to communicate with
flickr, hoping that at some point I could release flicksoup and then just link
frogr against it. However, mainly due to my permanent lack of (contigous) time
for these tasks, flicksoup ended up being stuck at some point, as well as
frogr, because of a kind of an egg-chicken problem: frogr didn't evolve because
flicksoup was not ready yet, and flicksoup didn't evolve because there was no
specific application (frogr) using it that drove the development of that
library in some way (because, due to my lack of time, building a 100% Flickr
API complete library was completely out of scope).

So, at late 2010 I decided to just move the sources of the flicksoup library
inside frogr so I could actually use it inside of that app to replace
flickcurl, via static linking... and that actually worked pretty well, since I
was able not only to replace flickcurl in a frogr that only uploaded pictures
by then (no sets, no groups, no cancelling operations, no error messages...) in
the way I always wanted to: through a GNOME-like library.

And so far, the situation was that I haven't had much time to think about
releasing flicksoup so I kept on developing changes for it just inside frogr,
and dumping every now and then those changes into its gitorious repo, just in
case someone wanted to use what I had in there, which is possible to build and
install as a shared library. And whenever I thought about that, I always came
up to the conclusion that the library was not mature enough (if I released it
now, I couldn't promise I wouldn't break API/ABI in the next releases), so I
decided to wait and keep using it this way...

And now we have a situation because of this so I, as the author and copyright
holder of both frogr and flicksoup, propose the following solution, if
possible:

  A. Stop saying all around (frogr web site, package descriptions, internal
files in frogr...) that Frogr "uses the flicksoup library... blablabla", and
stop treating that as if it were a separate and independently maintained
library (which it is not, it's just a dump of what I develop inside frogr).

  B. Use the same license for files inside src/flicksoup than for the rest of
frogr, that is, the GNU GPLv3 license.

  C. If necessary, I could even temporarily remove the flicksoup repository in
gitorious to strenght the idea of flicksoup not being a separately maintained
library (yet). When ready, if that ever happens (hope so!), I would do the
required changes by then: release flicksoup as a separate library, remove the
flicksoup-related files from frogr, and make frogr depend on flicksoup.

  D. ... anything else? <-- put your additional suggestion here

IMHO, this makes sense seems the truth is that, as I said, nos the flicksoup
repository is just a dump for the changes I do in those files inside frogr, and
it's actually kind of redundant thing, so it would even make sense to drop it
even if this

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #25 from Martin Gieseking  2011-06-02 
03:21:33 EDT ---
Here are some further information on how to treat the bundled library:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Treatment_Of_Bundled_Libraries

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #24 from Martin Gieseking  2011-06-02 
03:07:15 EDT ---
CFLAGS also defines some preprocessor constants (-DG_DISABLE_ASSERT
-DG_DISABLE_CHECKS -DG_DISABLE_CAST_CHECKS) that probably have to be added when
overwriting CFLAGS in the make statement. I'm not sure if they are actually
required, though.

Mario Sanchez Prada, since it's a bad idea to hard-code -g0 and -O2 in
configure.ac, I suggest to remove them in the next release.


Also, the source headers contain a wrong FSF address. It's recommended to use
the wording mentioned in COPYING:
You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
along with this program.  If not, see .


frogr seems to use the bundled library flicksoup (src/flicksoup) which is
available at http://gitorious.org/flicksoup. This is not allowed in Fedora. The
library must be packaged separately.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

Jussi Lehtola  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||jussi.leht...@iki.fi

--- Comment #23 from Jussi Lehtola  2011-06-01 18:15:47 
EDT ---
You might want to try if
 make CFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS" %{?_smp_mflags}
solves the problem with the optimization flags. (This in case sources only in
C, if you have C++ then you also have to define CXXFLAGS.)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #22 from Christophe Fergeau  2011-06-01 
17:50:52 EDT ---
It's likely, make detects configure.ac is newer than configure and tries to
regenrate it. You can either also patch configure in a similar way to get rid
of the extra flags, or rerun autoreconf -fi before %configure. NB: I haven't
checked in fedora guidelines if there's a recommended way of doing this.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #21 from Mario Blättermann  2011-06-01 17:44:18 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #19)
> - You should drop the flags "-Wall -g0 -O2" from CFLAGS in file configure.ac 
>   as they overwrite Fedora's %optflags and lead to debuginfo packages without 
>   sources.

Just tested it with the following patch:

--- configure.ac 2011-06-01 23:28:51.084852332 +0200
+++ configure.ac 2011-06-01 23:30:08.294665301 +0200
@@ -140,7 +140,7 @@
AC_DEFINE([DEBUG_ENABLED], [1], [Debug enabled])
CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -DG_ENABLE_DEBUG -DG_ERRORCHECK_MUTEXES -Wall -Werror -g3
-O0"
 else
-   CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -DG_DISABLE_ASSERT -DG_DISABLE_CHECKS
-DG_DISABLE_CAST_CHECKS -Wall -g0 -O2"
+   CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -DG_DISABLE_ASSERT -DG_DISABLE_CHECKS
-DG_DISABLE_CAST_CHECKS "
 fi

 # Substitute


But compiling fails with the following error:

+ make -j3
CDPATH="${ZSH_VERSION+.}:" && cd . && /bin/sh
/home/mariobl/rpmbuild/BUILD/frogr-0.5/missing --run aclocal-1.11 -I m4
aclocal-1.11: couldn't open directory `m4': No such file or directory
make: *** [aclocal.m4] Error 1

Is that due to my change?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #20 from Mario Blättermann  2011-06-01 17:27:20 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #19)

> I cleared the fedora-review flag as it should be set by the reviewer and you
> can't review your own packages. ;)
> 
Sorry, actually I want to have a look at the possible flags and I set this flag
probably by accidence... Regarding your other issues, I'll have a look at them
tomorrow.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

Martin Gieseking  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||martin.giesek...@uos.de
   Flag|fedora-review?  |

--- Comment #19 from Martin Gieseking  2011-06-01 
17:14:24 EDT ---
Hi Mario, here are some comments on the latest spec:

- building the package with mock fails because of missing BR: intltool

- You should drop the flags "-Wall -g0 -O2" from CFLAGS in file configure.ac 
  as they overwrite Fedora's %optflags and lead to debuginfo packages without 
  sources.

- drop the trailing asterisk from %{_datadir}/%{name}/* for proper directory 
  ownership

I cleared the fedora-review flag as it should be set by the reviewer and you
can't review your own packages. ;)


$ rpmlint *.rpm
frogr.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Flickr -> Flick, Flicker, Flicks
frogr.src: W: spelling-error Summary(de) Flickr -> Flicker, Flicke, Flickt
frogr.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Flickr -> Flick, Flicker, Flicks
frogr.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(de) Flickr -> Flicker, Flicke, Flickt
frogr-debuginfo.x86_64: E: debuginfo-without-sources
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 4 warnings.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

Mario Blättermann  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Flag||fedora-review?

--- Comment #18 from Mario Blättermann  2011-06-01 16:22:57 
EDT ---
Updated files:

Spec URL: http://mariobl.fedorapeople.org/Review/SPECS/frogr.spec
SRPM URL: http://mariobl.fedorapeople.org/Review/SRPMS/frogr-0.5-3.fc15.src.rpm

I've removed most of the stuff in %changelog, according to the packaging
guidelines. Furthermore, I've fixed the tabs/spaces in the header to make
rpmlint happy.

Once the package is approved and created a Git repo, I will also request a
branch for F14 to build a GTK2 based package.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #17 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-05-31 
16:44:13 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #15)
> [...]
> Right. Currently, we speak about v0.5, which doesn't ship the help files yet.
> Given the current state of the manual, you shouldn't think about a new 
> release.
> We should concentrate the effort now to package the 0.5 release for F15 and
> Rawhide.

Yes, forget about it (see my previous comment)

> Moreover, I think about to provide a GTK+2 based version for F14. Is Frogr
> still fully compatible to GTK+2, or are there any constraints?

Yes, it's fully compatible (no constraints at all), actually the packages I
provide in my PPA for Ubuntu Lucid and Maverick are compiled with gtk2, while
in Ubuntu Natty the packe is compiled with gtk3.

The configure.ac is written so frogr will compile this way:

  * If gtk3 devel files are present, frogr will build with gtk3 (default).

  * If no gtk3 devel files are present, but gtk2 devel files are, frogr will
build with gtk2 (default fallback when gtk3 is not present).

  * If both gtk2 and gtk3 devel files installed frogr will build with gtk3.

  * If both gtk2 and gtk3 devel files installed, but you still want to force
using gtk2, you can pass --with-gtk=2.0 to the configure script.

So as you can see, gtk3 is the default but frogr will build with gtk2 perfectly
anyway, either by not having gtk3 dev files present or because you explicitly
say it so. About restrictions there are none of them since the code already
uses some #ifdef ... #endif regions to take into account the differences that
must be taken into account in frogr when it comes to using gtk2 or gtk3

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #16 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-05-31 
16:34:20 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> (In reply to comment #12)
> > Don't you need to list there something like 
> > %{_datadir}/gnome/help/%{name}/*?
> 
> Yes you do, but only when you're using git :) The help files were added a few
> days ago so are not part of the 0.5 release. The rpm build fails when there 
> are
> files that were installed by "make install" but are not listed in %files, so
> missing files get noticed.

Ah! Yes, you're right, sorry for the noise. I forgot for a moment that we were
talking about 0.5 :-)

PS: Nice to see anyway that I was not wrong with my guessing :-)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #15 from Mario Blättermann  2011-05-31 16:12:14 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> (In reply to comment #12)
> > Don't you need to list there something like 
> > %{_datadir}/gnome/help/%{name}/*?
> 
> Yes you do, but only when you're using git :) The help files were added a few
> days ago so are not part of the 0.5 release. The rpm build fails when there 
> are
> files that were installed by "make install" but are not listed in %files, so
> missing files get noticed.

Right. Currently, we speak about v0.5, which doesn't ship the help files yet.
Given the current state of the manual, you shouldn't think about a new release.
We should concentrate the effort now to package the 0.5 release for F15 and
Rawhide.

Moreover, I think about to provide a GTK+2 based version for F14. Is Frogr
still fully compatible to GTK+2, or are there any constraints?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #12 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-05-31 
15:52:16 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> Many thanks for all the hints and improvements! I've now crowded the old spec
> file and built a new one based on the one in Git.
> 
> Spec URL: http://mariobl.fedorapeople.org/Review/SPECS/frogr.spec
[...]

In the following section:

   %files -f %{name}.lang
   %defattr(-,root,root,-)
   %{_bindir}/%{name}
   %{_datadir}/%{name}/*
   %{_datadir}/pixmaps/%{name}.xpm
   %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/*/apps/%{name}.png
   %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/*/apps/%{name}.svg
   %{_datadir}/applications/%{name}.desktop
   %{_mandir}/man1/frogr.1.*
   %doc README NEWS COPYING AUTHORS THANKS TODO MAINTAINERS TRANSLATORS


Don't you need to list there something like %{_datadir}/gnome/help/%{name}/*?

I'm talking from my vast ignorance on the topic, just wondering because when I
was playing yesterday with the .spec file, I needed to do it so the help files
got installed through the rpm package.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #13 from Christophe Fergeau  2011-05-31 
15:52:47 EDT ---
Fwiw, 
$ rpmlint frogr-0.5-2.fc15.src.rpm 
frogr.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Flickr -> Flick, Flicker, Flicks
frogr.src: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found de
frogr.src:4: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 4, tab: line 1)
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

The 1st warning is a false alarm, I'm not sure what the 2nd one means, but it's
related to the german descriptions that are in there I guess, the last one
should be fixed :)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #14 from Christophe Fergeau  2011-05-31 
15:54:23 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> Don't you need to list there something like %{_datadir}/gnome/help/%{name}/*?

Yes you do, but only when you're using git :) The help files were added a few
days ago so are not part of the 0.5 release. The rpm build fails when there are
files that were installed by "make install" but are not listed in %files, so
missing files get noticed.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #11 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-05-31 
15:49:03 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> Just tested Frogr 0.5. It starts with an empty window, although Frogr is
> already authorized to Flickr correctly. I can choose local pictures, tag them,
> change the description and upload them. But once the pictures have been
> uploaded to Flickr, the window becomes empty again. Is this behavior intended
> to be so, or should I actually be able to browse through the pictures at
> flickr.com?

What you described is exactly the expected behavior :-)

Even though the original idea behind frogr is to have a full featured flickr
manager, the truth is that at the moment it is just a flickr uploader, so
that's why you don't see anything as soon as you start frogr, and the only
feedback you have about being logged in is the string in the status bar saying
"Connected as username".

Also, the behavior of getting the window empty again after uploading is also
the expected behaviour, since every picture is removed after a successful
upload, both to give feedback to the user (as in "one picture less to be
uploaded") and to leave the application in a handy state if something fails in
the middle, so resuming the process would be just a matter of clicking upload
again.

So, short answer: yes, it's the expected behaviour, since it's just an uploader
at the moment, despite of the word "organizer" in the app name.

Thanks

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #10 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-05-31 
15:43:46 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> [...]
> However, I'm unsure if we need such a changelog. It reflects all the changes
> due to the software itself, although our package changelog is actually for
> changes to the package. The packaging guidelines say the following [1]:
> 
> [...]
> 
> Means, we can drop all the changelog entries which also be found in the
> upstream changelog anyway.
> 
> [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#Changelogs

I agree with you. Let's drop all the entries (that are in NEWS file anyway) and
keep there just the changes related to the package, as it's already being done
in Debian (I mean, in the package shipped with debian distros, not in my
particular version of the debian/changelog file)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #9 from Mario Blättermann  2011-05-31 15:20:39 
EDT ---
Just tested Frogr 0.5. It starts with an empty window, although Frogr is
already authorized to Flickr correctly. I can choose local pictures, tag them,
change the description and upload them. But once the pictures have been
uploaded to Flickr, the window becomes empty again. Is this behavior intended
to be so, or should I actually be able to browse through the pictures at
flickr.com?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #8 from Mario Blättermann  2011-05-31 14:57:44 
EDT ---
Sorry, just pushed the wrong srpm link. The right one is:

SRPM URL: http://mariobl.fedorapeople.org/Review/SRPMS/frogr-0.5-2.fc15.src.rpm

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #7 from Mario Blättermann  2011-05-31 14:56:08 
EDT ---
Many thanks for all the hints and improvements! I've now crowded the old spec
file and built a new one based on the one in Git.

Spec URL: http://mariobl.fedorapeople.org/Review/SPECS/frogr.spec
SRPM URL: http://mariobl.fedorapeople.org/Review/SRPMS/frogr-0.5-1.fc15.src.rpm
Description:
Frogr is a small application for the GNOME desktop that allows users
to manage their accounts in the Flickr image hosting website. It
supports all the basic tasks, including uploading pictures, adding
descriptions, setting tags and managing sets.

However, I'm unsure if we need such a changelog. It reflects all the changes
due to the software itself, although our package changelog is actually for
changes to the package. The packaging guidelines say the following [1]:

"Changelog entries should provide a brief summary of the changes done to the
package between releases, including noting updating to a new version, adding a
patch, fixing other spec sections, note bugs fixed, and CVE's if any. They must
never simply contain an entire copy of the source CHANGELOG entries. The intent
is to give the user a hint as to what changed in a package update without
overwhelming them with the technical details. Links to upstream changelogs can
be entered for those who want additional information."

Means, we can drop all the changelog entries which also be found in the
upstream changelog anyway.

[1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#Changelogs

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #6 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-05-31 
09:15:10 EDT ---
Breaking News:

As a result of a conversation in my blog [1] Christophe Fergeau, who obviously
knows a lot more than me when it comes to Fedora packaging :-), has been doing
some follow-up work on that matter and have updated the frogr.spec file in
frogr git repository, which I think you should consider to avoid duplicating
efforts:

  http://git.gnome.org/browse/frogr/tree/frogr.spec

I already told him about this being tracked in this bugzilla, so all the people
interested can be in the same page.

Thanks Christophe!

[1] http://blogs.igalia.com/mario/2011/05/27/frogr-0-5-released

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #5 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-05-30 
15:40:38 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> [...]
> > As you can see, the first paragraph is basically what I pasted you before, 
> > with
> > the simple addition of "... and group pools" (which would be a nice 
> > addition to
> > Fedora's description, if you ask me).
> > 
> Yes, you are right. Now I know it again: I had googled for "frogr fedora" and
> got the spec file. Don't know the source, but I've downloaded it and began to
> edit it to match the new upstream version. In any case, thanks for your hints.

Ah, ok. So you started from an old version of the .spec file I was using. That
explains everything :-)

> I was surprised about the spec file in Git, which shows that you was working
> continuously on the Fedora package. And never thought about to publish it...?

:-)

Yes, I was using the .spec file a lot, at first just to generate .rpm files
when I made a release, but very often lately since I switched from Ubuntu to
Fedora, to generate pacakges that I could easily install in my system to dog
food frogr.

However, I never thought about publishing it myself because I had no clue about
the .spec file being correct or not. For me it was a "just works" file that
easily generated .rpm files when I needed it, without needed to worry too much
about being a proper spec file, which would probably need to follow some
guidelines/rules/whatever that I, as an unexperienced Fedora user, had no idea
about.

Actually the initial version of that .spec file was not written by me and I
just cared about updating it whenever needed to keep generating rpms when I
needed it.

Anyway, I agree with you that it's weird to have that .spec file in there and
not having pushed for integrating frogr in Fedora before, but as I said in a
comment to my last post about frogr, the simple reason for that is that I
lacked the self-confidence and the knowledge on the processes in the Fedora
community for doing that, so I just went for the "dear lazyweb" approach of
asking the world to help me with packaging issues :-)

> OK, no problem, once we have a reviewer and all the mistakes related to the
> package are fixed, Frogr will become part of the official Fedora package pool.

Great! And glad again to see that frogr is reaching fedora in one way or
another :-)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #4 from Mario Blättermann  2011-05-30 14:49:08 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Hmm.. I think you're doing something wrong, since what is stated in
> http://live.gnome.org/Frogr, in the "Overview" section, is the following:
> 
> """
> Frogr is a small application for the GNOME desktop that allows users to manage
> their accounts in the Flickr image hosting website. It supports all the basic
> Flickr features, including uploading pictures, adding descriptions, setting
> tags and managing sets and groups pools.
> 
> This application is written in C and uses flicksoup, a libsoup-based library 
> to
> communicate with the server through the publicly available flickr REST API.
> 
> This project is Free Software and published under the terms of the GNU Public
> License v3."
> """
> 
> As you can see, the first paragraph is basically what I pasted you before, 
> with
> the simple addition of "... and group pools" (which would be a nice addition 
> to
> Fedora's description, if you ask me).
> 
Yes, you are right. Now I know it again: I had googled for "frogr fedora" and
got the spec file. Don't know the source, but I've downloaded it and began to
edit it to match the new upstream version. In any case, thanks for your hints.

I was surprised about the spec file in Git, which shows that you was working
continuously on the Fedora package. And never thought about to publish it...?
OK, no problem, once we have a reviewer and all the mistakes related to the
package are fixed, Frogr will become part of the official Fedora package pool.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #3 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-05-30 
14:21:25 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> [...]
> > "Frogr is a small application for the GNOME desktop that allows users
> > to manage their accounts in the Flickr image hosting website. It
> > supports all the basic tasks, including uploading pictures, adding
> > descriptions, setting tags and managing sets."
> 
> The description from my spec file is picked up from Frogr's website:
> 
> http://live.gnome.org/Frogr
> 
> Or, actually, what I recognize as Frogr's website. Could be there is another
> website which isn't known to me. If I'm right, someone should update this.

Hmm.. I think you're doing something wrong, since what is stated in
http://live.gnome.org/Frogr, in the "Overview" section, is the following:

"""
Frogr is a small application for the GNOME desktop that allows users to manage
their accounts in the Flickr image hosting website. It supports all the basic
Flickr features, including uploading pictures, adding descriptions, setting
tags and managing sets and groups pools.

This application is written in C and uses flicksoup, a libsoup-based library to
communicate with the server through the publicly available flickr REST API.

This project is Free Software and published under the terms of the GNU Public
License v3."
"""

As you can see, the first paragraph is basically what I pasted you before, with
the simple addition of "... and group pools" (which would be a nice addition to
Fedora's description, if you ask me).

There's an old and deprecated site at Google Code
(http://code.google.com/p/frogr) but no mention to flickcurl is being made
there nowadays either... you must be getting that description from somewhere
else. If you find it and it's my fault please let me know and I'll change it.


> Regarding your hints, I will have a look at the dependencies tomorrow. Many
> thanks for your help!

Glad to see you found it useful.

Thanks!

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

--- Comment #2 from Mario Blättermann  2011-05-30 14:09:16 
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> As the main developer of frogr so far, please let me say thanks for you
> reporting this bug and pushing for getting frogr integrated in Fedora. Thanks!
> 
> Now, just a couple of comments that I hope you'll find useful:
> 
> (In reply to comment #0)
> > Spec URL: http://mariobl.fedorapeople.org/Review/SPECS/frogr.spec
> > SRPM URL: 
> > http://mariobl.fedorapeople.org/Review/SRPMS/frogr-0.5-1.fc15.src.rpm
> > Description:
> > Frogr intends to be a complete GNOME application to remotely manage a flickr
> > account from the desktop. It uses flickcurl, from Dave Beckett to
> > communicate with the server through the publicly available flickr REST API.
> 
> This description is not correct. Since frogr 0.3 flickcurl is not being used
> anymore, as we used our own libsoup-based library called flicksoup, which is
> not being released separately yet (its development happens inside the frogr
> tree at the moment). Nowadays, the "official" description that's used
> everywhere is something like this:
> 
> "Frogr is a small application for the GNOME desktop that allows users
> to manage their accounts in the Flickr image hosting website. It
> supports all the basic tasks, including uploading pictures, adding
> descriptions, setting tags and managing sets."

The description from my spec file is picked up from Frogr's website:

http://live.gnome.org/Frogr

Or, actually, what I recognize as Frogr's website. Could be there is another
website which isn't known to me. If I'm right, someone should update this.

Regarding your hints, I will have a look at the dependencies tomorrow. Many
thanks for your help!

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 708765] Review Request: Frogr - Flickr Remote Organizer for GNOME

[bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708765

Mario Sanchez Prada  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||msanc...@igalia.com

--- Comment #1 from Mario Sanchez Prada  2011-05-30 
13:51:43 EDT ---
As the main developer of frogr so far, please let me say thanks for you
reporting this bug and pushing for getting frogr integrated in Fedora. Thanks!

Now, just a couple of comments that I hope you'll find useful:

(In reply to comment #0)
> Spec URL: http://mariobl.fedorapeople.org/Review/SPECS/frogr.spec
> SRPM URL: 
> http://mariobl.fedorapeople.org/Review/SRPMS/frogr-0.5-1.fc15.src.rpm
> Description:
> Frogr intends to be a complete GNOME application to remotely manage a flickr
> account from the desktop. It uses flickcurl, from Dave Beckett to
> communicate with the server through the publicly available flickr REST API.

This description is not correct. Since frogr 0.3 flickcurl is not being used
anymore, as we used our own libsoup-based library called flicksoup, which is
not being released separately yet (its development happens inside the frogr
tree at the moment). Nowadays, the "official" description that's used
everywhere is something like this:

"Frogr is a small application for the GNOME desktop that allows users
to manage their accounts in the Flickr image hosting website. It
supports all the basic tasks, including uploading pictures, adding
descriptions, setting tags and managing sets."


> The program doesn't provide all the expected features yet, seems it needs
> additional libraries which are not requested during the build process. Stay
> tuned, I try to find them out.

I think you'll find useful the list I use to generate "homegrown" fedora
packages while frogr is not shipped right from the distro:

 BuildRequires: gtk3-devel > 3.0, libsoup-devel > 2.24, libxml2-devel > 2.6.8,
libexif-devel > 0.6.14
 Requires: gtk3 > 3.0, libsoup > 2.24, libxml2 > 2.6.8, libexif > 0.6.14, gvfs,
desktop-file-utils

Also, you can take a look to the .spec file I used to build those "homegrown"
packages for frogr 0.5:
http://git.gnome.org/browse/frogr/tree/frogr.spec?id=003b3101cedb6e129eff60af4e4b6976afb3ab4c


Hope this helps!

Thanks,
Mario

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review