[Bug 1269649] Review Request: aeskulap - Full open source replacement for commercially available DICOM viewer

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269649 --- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System --- aeskulap-0.2.2-0.25.beta1.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are

[Bug 1269649] Review Request: aeskulap - Full open source replacement for commercially available DICOM viewer

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269649 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA

[Bug 1269649] Review Request: aeskulap - Full open source replacement for commercially available DICOM viewer

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269649 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA

[Bug 1269649] Review Request: aeskulap - Full open source replacement for commercially available DICOM viewer

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269649 --- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System --- aeskulap-0.2.2-0.25.beta1.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to

[Bug 1269649] Review Request: aeskulap - Full open source replacement for commercially available DICOM viewer

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269649 --- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System --- aeskulap-0.2.2-0.25.beta1.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-d863c0d250 -- You are receiving this

[Bug 1269649] Review Request: aeskulap - Full open source replacement for commercially available DICOM viewer

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269649 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug 1269649] Review Request: aeskulap - Full open source replacement for commercially available DICOM viewer

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269649 --- Comment #20 from Jens Lody --- Many thanks for the review ! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component

[Bug 1269649] Review Request: aeskulap - Full open source replacement for commercially available DICOM viewer

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269649 Antonio Trande changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+

[Bug 1269649] Review Request: aeskulap - Full open source replacement for commercially available DICOM viewer

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269649 --- Comment #18 from Jens Lody --- Updated srpm- and spec-files, doc-package now with license-file: https://rpm.jenslody.de/review/aeskulap-0.2.2-0.25.beta1.fc23.src.rpm https://rpm.jenslody.de/review/aeskulap.spec --

[Bug 1269649] Review Request: aeskulap - Full open source replacement for commercially available DICOM viewer

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269649 --- Comment #17 from Antonio Trande --- >> - -doc subpackage must not require main package; it's >> standalone and must provide an own license file. >> >done for the first issue, the second one is a bit tricky, I

[Bug 1269649] Review Request: aeskulap - Full open source replacement for commercially available DICOM viewer

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269649 --- Comment #16 from Jens Lody --- (In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #15) > - There is code released with GPLv2+ license. > Please, update License: 'LGPLv2+ and GPLv2+' > done > - Please, update incorrect FSF

[Bug 1269649] Review Request: aeskulap - Full open source replacement for commercially available DICOM viewer

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269649 --- Comment #15 from Antonio Trande --- - There is code released with GPLv2+ license. Please, update License: 'LGPLv2+ and GPLv2+' - Please, update incorrect FSF address - COPYING.LIB is not packaged. - -doc

[Bug 1269649] Review Request: aeskulap - Full open source replacement for commercially available DICOM viewer

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269649 --- Comment #14 from Jens Lody --- Here it comes. I still tagged it as beta1, maybe beta2 would be better. Most things should be okay now. It still uses GSConf instead of GSettings/dconf, but this is something that needs

[Bug 1269649] Review Request: aeskulap - Full open source replacement for commercially available DICOM viewer

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269649 --- Comment #13 from Antonio Trande --- (In reply to Jens Lody from comment #12) > I just got a mail from the aeskulap developer (Alexander Pipelka). > He has no time to do any further development of the project, but he

[Bug 1269649] Review Request: aeskulap - Full open source replacement for commercially available DICOM viewer

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269649 --- Comment #11 from Jens Lody --- It took a little longer, sorry. Much work, other package in review (and reviewed). I tried to contact the author of aeskulap via mail (I took the mail address from github commits) and

[Bug 1269649] Review Request: aeskulap - Full open source replacement for commercially available DICOM viewer

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269649 --- Comment #12 from Jens Lody --- I just got a mail from the aeskulap developer (Alexander Pipelka). He has no time to do any further development of the project, but he would be glad if somebody would work on it. So I

[Bug 1269649] Review Request: aeskulap - Full open source replacement for commercially available DICOM viewer

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269649 --- Comment #8 from Jens Lody --- I just found this github repo from original developer: https://github.com/pipelka/aeskulap , this pull-request from Debian: https://github.com/pipelka/aeskulap/pull/1 and a bug-report from

[Bug 1269649] Review Request: aeskulap - Full open source replacement for commercially available DICOM viewer

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269649 --- Comment #9 from Antonio Trande --- >So even if there is no active development, there is a valid upstream and the >>possibility to get my build- and bug fix merged into upstream. > >There is still the option to fork

[Bug 1269649] Review Request: aeskulap - Full open source replacement for commercially available DICOM viewer

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269649 --- Comment #10 from Jens Lody --- If possible, I will update the src.rpm and spec-file this evening (UTC+1) and upload it. I will also add two pull requests to the aeskulap-repo on github, to see if my dcmtk 3.6.1 patch

[Bug 1269649] Review Request: aeskulap - Full open source replacement for commercially available DICOM viewer

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269649 --- Comment #4 from Jens Lody --- Actual copr-builds: https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/jenslody/Tests/monitor/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about

[Bug 1269649] Review Request: aeskulap - Full open source replacement for commercially available DICOM viewer

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269649 --- Comment #6 from Jens Lody --- (In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #5) > # Note: upstream is dead, so patches can not be included in the original > sources. > # The source does not exist any longer on the old

[Bug 1269649] Review Request: aeskulap - Full open source replacement for commercially available DICOM viewer

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269649 --- Comment #7 from Antonio Trande --- The simplest way would be to keep the same name. Need read carefully how the code is licensed. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are

[Bug 1269649] Review Request: aeskulap - Full open source replacement for commercially available DICOM viewer

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269649 Antonio Trande changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug 1269649] Review Request: aeskulap - Full open source replacement for commercially available DICOM viewer

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269649 --- Comment #5 from Antonio Trande --- # Note: upstream is dead, so patches can not be included in the original sources. # The source does not exist any longer on the old server, but can be downloaded via archive.org. #

[Bug 1269649] Review Request: aeskulap - Full open source replacement for commercially available DICOM viewer

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269649 --- Comment #3 from Jens Lody --- Updated spe-file and srpm. Builds in F23 and greater now. (At least) glibmm24 seems to need the "-std=c++11"-parameter now. https://rpm.jenslody.de/review/aeskulap.spec

[Bug 1269649] Review Request: aeskulap - Full open source replacement for commercially available DICOM viewer

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269649 --- Comment #1 from Jens Lody --- This review is an unretirement review. aeskulap was retired due to dependency-problems before F22. I fixed these problems and also a possible crash, that happened to me also in F21. --

[Bug 1269649] Review Request: aeskulap - Full open source replacement for commercially available DICOM viewer

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269649 --- Comment #2 from Jens Lody --- It currently does not build in F23 and Rawhide, I will dig into this as soon as possible. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always