[Bug 1418] Review request: povray - Persistence of Vision Ray-Tracer
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1418 rc040...@freenet.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rc040...@freenet.de --- Comment #2 from rc040...@freenet.de 2010-09-17 05:47:22 --- (In reply to comment #1) > The proper way of doing this is: You first send an email to the Fedora Legal > mailing list, post the link of the distribution license, and ask them if it is > okay to include it in Fedora. If they say no, then you come to RPMFusion and > give a reference here to Fedora Legal's decision. Well, a) Povray is non-free. This is a well known fact for many years and had been subject to many discussions. b) Inclusion of povray into Fedora had been subject to discussions in the early days of Fedora and was ruled out a non-free. c) Maintaining povray as part of a distro puts the maintainer at legal risks, because section 1 (esp. 1.2) of http://www.povray.org/source-license.html renders povray's sources to be "effectively unmodifiable" (A distro's package maintainer put himself under legal risks if he modifies the code). That said, if I were prospective maintainer of an rpmfusion povray package, I would directly contact POVray and ask them for permission. (In reply to comment #0) > SPEC: http://pikachu.2014.free.fr/public/alexises/packaging/povray/povray.spec > SRPM: > http://pikachu.2014.free.fr/public/alexises/packaging/povray/povray-3.7.0.beta.38-1.fc13.src.rpm Apart of what I wrote above, I don't see much sense in shipping povray-3.7.0.beta. If RPMfusion wants to ship povray, it should ship povray-3.6.x. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 1418] Review request: povray - Persistence of Vision Ray-Tracer
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1418 Orcan Ogetbil changed: What|Removed |Added CC||oget.fed...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Orcan Ogetbil 2010-09-16 22:48:57 --- The proper way of doing this is: You first send an email to the Fedora Legal mailing list, post the link of the distribution license, and ask them if it is okay to include it in Fedora. If they say no, then you come to RPMFusion and give a reference here to Fedora Legal's decision. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 1418] New: Review request: povray - Persistence of Vision Ray-Tracer
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1418 Summary: Review request: povray - Persistence of Vision Ray- Tracer Product: Package Reviews Version: Current Platform: All OS/Version: GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: Review Request AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-rev...@rpmfusion.org ReportedBy: alexisis-pristont...@hotmail.com CC: rpmfusion-package-rev...@rpmfusion.org Blocks: 2 Estimated Hours: 0.0 SPEC: http://pikachu.2014.free.fr/public/alexises/packaging/povray/povray.spec SRPM: http://pikachu.2014.free.fr/public/alexises/packaging/povray/povray-3.7.0.beta.38-1.fc13.src.rpm Description: The Persistence of Vision Raytracer is a high-quality, totally free tool for creating stunning three-dimensional graphics Why not in Fedora? See http://www.povray.org/povlegal.html and http://www.povray.org/distribution-license.html Anyway, the license confuses me enough to ask a kind of legal review to confirm that Povray can be distributed through RPM Fusion. Mock build logs: http://pikachu.2014.free.fr/public/alexises/packaging/povray/build.log Binary RPM are also avaible in http://pikachu.2014.free.fr/public/alexises/packaging/povray/ Rpmlint output : * povray-timerom-fonts.noarch: W: invalid-license povray povray-crystal-fonts.noarch: W: invalid-license povray povray-examples.noarch: W: invalid-license povray povray-doc.noarch: W: invalid-license povray povray-debuginfo.i686: W: invalid-license povray povray-povlogo-fonts.noarch: W: invalid-license povray povray-cyrvetica-fonts.noarch: W: invalid-license povray povray.src: W: invalid-license povray povray.i686: W: invalid-license povray * povray-crystal-fonts.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Monospace -> Mono space, Mono-space, Monospermous povray-cyrvetica-fonts.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) lvetica -> Helvetic, Helvetia, poetical povray-cyrvetica-fonts.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US lvetica -> Helvetic, Helvetia, poetical => false positives * povray.src:20: W: macro-in-comment %DOCDIR povray.src:23: W: macro-in-comment %INSTALLDIR * povray.i686: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/povray-3.7.0.beta.38/povlegal.doc => This license file is GPG-signed and so should not be altered. I provided in the same directory the same file converted to UTF8 and named povlegal.doc.utf8 This is my first package for RPM Fusion but I'm a sponsored Fedora packager (FAS account: alexises). -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.
Re: UADE package for rpmfusion
On Wed, 2010-09-15 at 19:05 +0200, Andrea Musuruane wrote: > > Would you have time to do this? Otherwise, would you mind if I do it? > > AFAIK Ian has orphaned all his packages a long ago for personal > matters. It is not possible he's still the maintainer. If the package is really orphaned, I'd be willing to make a small effort at adopt it. Don't expect too much from me -- my time is really short, but I like uade. -- // Bernie Innocenti - http://codewiz.org/ \X/ Sugar Labs - http://sugarlabs.org/
[Bug 1309] Review Request: phonon-backend-vlc - VLC phonon backend
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1309 --- Comment #17 from Rex Dieter 2010-09-16 19:25:48 --- Thanks! -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 1309] Review Request: phonon-backend-vlc - VLC phonon backend
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1309 NicolasChauvet changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|33 | -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 1309] Review Request: phonon-backend-vlc - VLC phonon backend
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1309 Hicham HAOUARI changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||4, 33 -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 1309] Review Request: phonon-backend-vlc - VLC phonon backend
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1309 --- Comment #16 from Hicham HAOUARI 2010-09-16 19:05:15 --- I wasn't waiting for such a reply. Anyway, I don't have any further remarks. So this package is : APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 1309] Review Request: phonon-backend-vlc - VLC phonon backend
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1309 --- Comment #15 from Rex Dieter 2010-09-16 19:00:48 --- Heck, if you insist, I'll just strip it out, and create a standalone .sh script to create snapshot tarballs, to remove the need for them in the .spec at all. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 1309] Review Request: phonon-backend-vlc - VLC phonon backend
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1309 --- Comment #14 from Rex Dieter 2010-09-16 18:58:27 --- Ping what? I uploaded a newer version of the package, and gave rationale why there's not much point in changing macros-in-comments, do you not agree (and are considering it a review blocker)? -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 1309] Review Request: phonon-backend-vlc - VLC phonon backend
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1309 --- Comment #13 from Hicham HAOUARI 2010-09-16 18:51:55 --- ping -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug.
Re: New packager
On Wed, 2010-09-15 at 11:35 +0200, Nicolas Chauvet wrote: > > My FAS username is bernie. I've already signed the CLA and applied for > > the cvsextras group. > Your account have been sponsored for the cvsextras group in RPM Fusion. Thank you very much. > But please remerber that before overriding maintainer role, you should > better submit a bug and eventually provide an updated spec file, in > case of when an update in needed. If the current maintainer fails in > is role for some reason, then a full time co-maintainership should be > thought. Ok. Is contacting the maintainer necessary even for simple rebuilds with no changes to the spec file other than a revision bump? Another question: does rpmfusion have a bot or a web interface for querying maintainers? > If no answear have given in a reasonable time, then you can consider > to step in for primary maintainership. > > But if none step in for maintainership of a package, the correct > answear is to have such package removed. Ok, understood. I just contacted the person who seems to be the current maintainer of uade. -- // Bernie Innocenti - http://codewiz.org/ \X/ Sugar Labs - http://sugarlabs.org/
