July 2011 - rpmfusion-developers

[Bug 540] New: Review Request: elisa-plugins-ugly - Ugly Plugins for the Elisa Media Center

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=540 Summary: Review Request: elisa-plugins-ugly - Ugly Plugins for the Elisa Media Center Product: Package Reviews Version: Current Platform: All OS/Version: GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: Review Request AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org ReportedBy: matthias(a)rpmforge.net CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Blocks: 2 Estimated Hours: 0.0 http://thias.fedorapeople.org/review/elisa-plugins-ugly/elisa-plugins-ugl... http://thias.fedorapeople.org/review/elisa-plugins-ugly/elisa-plugins-ugl... This package contains the ugly set of plugins for the Elisa Media Center, plugins which might present licensing or other similar issues. Not in Fedora : Currently there are no license issue AFAICS, but there could be at any time. The current plugins are probably considered "ugly" because they access remote services in non standard ways (flickr, shoutcast, youtube), which could present issues. Not having it in Fedora also helps put in the "gstreamer-plugins-ugly" dependency here. rpmlint output : elisa-plugins-ugly.noarch: W: no-documentation 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. rpmlint output reason : There is no documentation shipped with this package, not even a copy of the GPL (though all of the sources have their headers mentioning the GPL properly). -- 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.

13 years, 2 months

1
4
0 / 0

[Bug 534] New: scourge-Rogue-like RPG

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=534 Summary: scourge-Rogue-like RPG Product: Package Reviews Version: Current Platform: All URL: http://scourgeweb.org/tiki-index.php OS/Version: GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: Review Request AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org ReportedBy: leadgolem(a)gmail.com CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Blocks: 2,30 Estimated Hours: 0.0 http://leadgolem.homeip.net/scourge-0.21.1-2.src.rpm http://leadgolem.homeip.net/scourge.spec S.C.O.U.R.G.E. is a rogue-like game in the fine tradition of NetHack and Moria It sports a graphical front-end, similar to glHack or the Falcon's eye. I tried to design the 3D UI as a best of both worlds from old to new: It lets you rotate the view, zoom in/out, view special effects, etc. On the other hand I've always liked the old-school isometric games like Exult or Woodward. The above description makes it sound like I developed the code in this program. I didn't. The scourge-data package which is required for this to run is licensing mess. None of it is actually ripped off, as far as I can tell. However many of the content files are either undocumented or no license is actually stated. There are no rpmlint errors or warnings from spec, src.rpm, or binary rpms. This is my first rpmfusion package and I am seeking a sponsor. -- 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.

13 years, 2 months

1
7
0 / 0

[Bug 535] New: Review request:scourge-Data files for scourge

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=535 Summary: Review request:scourge-Data files for scourge Product: Package Reviews Version: Current Platform: All URL: http://scourgeweb.org/tiki-index.php OS/Version: GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: Review Request AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org ReportedBy: leadgolem(a)gmail.com CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Depends on: 534 Blocks: 2,30 Estimated Hours: 0.0 http://leadgolem.homeip.net/scourge-data-0.21.1-2.src.rpm http://leadgolem.homeip.net/scourge-data.spec Data files for scourge. The scourge-data package is a licensing mess. None of it is actually ripped off, as far as I can tell. However many of the content files are either undocumented or no license is actually stated. There are no rpmlint errors or warnings from spec, src.rpm, or binary rpms. This is my first rpmfusion package and I am seeking a sponsor. -- 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.

13 years, 2 months

1
2
0 / 0

[Bug 528] New: mlt++ - C++ wrapper for the MLT library

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=528 Summary: mlt++ - C++ wrapper for the MLT library Product: Package Reviews Version: Current Platform: All OS/Version: GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: Review Request AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org ReportedBy: zarko.pintar(a)gmail.com CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Depends on: 527 Blocks: 2,30 Estimated Hours: 0.0 Spec: http://wiki.open.hr/~zpintar/fedora10/RPMFusion/SPECS/mlt++.spec Source: http://wiki.open.hr/~zpintar/fedora10/RPMFusion/SRPMS/mlt++-0.3.6-2.fc10.... Description: This mlt sub-project provides a C++ wrapping for the MLT library. MLT is an open source multimedia framework, designed and developed for television broadcasting. It provides a toolkit for broadcasters, video editors, media players, transcoders, web streamers and many more types of applications. The functionality of the system is provided via an assortment of ready to use tools, xml authoring components, and an extendible plug-in based API. This package hardly depend on ffmpeg library (without them is mostly useless), so this is the main reason why I put them here. rpmlint -mlt++ -------------- mlt++-devel.i386: W: no-documentation mlt++-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 8 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. There is no documentations provided by the author for devel package No more warnings in source and binary RPMs. Package tested with mock for i386 and x86_64 architectures. This is one of my first packages on RPM Fusion. On Fedora I put four packages last month. But I'm not yet sponsored there, so I seeking for sponsor here. kind regards, Zarko -- 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.

13 years, 2 months

1
10
0 / 0

[Bug 449] New: Review Request: libvdpau - Wrapper library for the Video Decode and Presentation API

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=449 Summary: Review Request: libvdpau - Wrapper library for the Video Decode and Presentation API Product: Package Reviews Version: Current Platform: All OS/Version: GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: Review Request AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org ReportedBy: kwizart(a)gmail.com CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Estimated Hours: 0.0 SRPMS: http://rpms.kwizart.net/fedora/10/SRPMS/libvdpau-0.1-0.1git20090318.fc10.... SPEC: http://rpms.kwizart.net/fedora/reviews/libvdpau/libvdpau.spec Summary: Wrapper library for the Video Decode and Presentation API This package is submitted in rpmfusion because at this time, the only implementation of the vdpau API is in binary form (nvidia main driver). Since this library still evolve , there is a need to have it updated along with the matching binary driver. Furthermore vdpau require an ffmpeg library to work at this time. -- 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.

13 years, 2 months

1
11
0 / 0

[Bug 446] New: Review request: perl-Date-ICal - Perl extension for ICalendar date objects

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=446 Summary: Review request: perl-Date-ICal - Perl extension for ICalendar date objects Product: Package Reviews Version: Current Platform: All OS/Version: GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: Review Request AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org ReportedBy: xavier(a)bachelot.org CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Depends on: 445 Blocks: 2 Estimated Hours: 0.0 Spec URL: http://www.bachelot.org/fedora/SPECS/perl-Date-ICal.spec SRPM URL: http://www.bachelot.org/fedora/SRPMS/perl-Date-ICal-1.72-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Date::ICal talks the ICal date format, and is intended to be a base class for other date/calendar modules that know about ICal time format also. Depends on perl-Date-Leapyear which is under Artistic 1.0 license (non-free according to Fedora). rpmlint : silent -- 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.

13 years, 2 months

1
3
0 / 0

[Bug 445] New: Review request: perl-Date-Leapyear - Is a particular year a leap year?

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=445 Summary: Review request: perl-Date-Leapyear - Is a particular year a leap year? Product: Package Reviews Version: Current Platform: All OS/Version: GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: Review Request AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org ReportedBy: xavier(a)bachelot.org CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Blocks: 2 Estimated Hours: 0.0 Spec URL: http://www.bachelot.org/fedora/SPECS/perl-Date-Leapyear.spec SRPM URL: http://www.bachelot.org/fedora/SRPMS/perl-Date-Leapyear-1.71-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Date::Leapyear exports one function - isleap - which returns 1 or 0 if a year is leap, or not, respectively. License is Artistic 1.0, which is non-free according to Fedora. rpmlint : perl-Date-Leapyear.src: W: invalid-license Artistic 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. --> The reason why it's not in Fedora. This is my first package for RPM Fusion, but I'm already sponsored in Fedora. -- 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.

13 years, 2 months

1
8
0 / 0

[Bug 440] New: Review request: vbam - Nintendo Gameboy, Gameboy Color, and Gameboy Advance Emulator

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=440 Summary: Review request: vbam - Nintendo Gameboy, Gameboy Color, and Gameboy Advance Emulator Product: Package Reviews Version: Current Platform: All URL: http://sourceforge.net/projects/vbam OS/Version: GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: Review Request AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org ReportedBy: dave(a)is1337.net CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Blocks: 2,30 Estimated Hours: 0.0 Spec: http://dave.is1337.net/sources/vbam.spec SRPM: http://dave.is1337.net/sources/vbam-1.8.0-0.1.20090313svn856.fc10.src.rpm Description: The VisualBoyAdvance Merge (VBA-M) project is an effort to unify all the useful patches to the VisualBoyAdvance project, a Nintendo Gameboy Advance emulator. General maintenance of the emulator has moved to VBA-M after active development of the original VBA project stopped. This was Red Hat's decision on including VBA in Fedora: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=466658 VBA-M is derived from VBA, so I assume they would have the same opinion. rpmlint SPECS/vbam.spec \ SRPMS/vbam-1.8.0-0.1.20090313svn856.fc10.src.rpm \ RPMS/x86_64/vbam-1.8.0-0.1.20090313svn856.fc10.x86_64.rpm 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. This is my first submission to RPM Fusion, so I would like to request a sponsor. -- 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.

13 years, 2 months

2
27
0 / 0

[Bug 437] New: Review Request: rubygem-passenger - Passenger Ruby on Rails deployment system

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=437 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-passenger - Passenger Ruby on Rails deployment system Product: Package Reviews Version: Current Platform: All OS/Version: GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: Review Request AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org ReportedBy: kanarip(a)kanarip.com CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Estimated Hours: 0.0 SPEC: http://www.kanarip.com/custom/SPECS/rubygem-passenger.spec SRPM: http://www.kanarip.com/custom/f10/SRPMS/rubygem-passenger-2.0.6-2.fc10.sr... Description: Phusion Passenger is a deployment system for Ruby on Rails applications on Apache, i.e. a 'mod_rails'. Rails deployment becomes an "upload & done" process. No eligible for inclusion to Fedora, because: See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=470696#c7 (incompatible licenses in the sources). No response or action from upstream parties. rpmlint output: [jmeeuwen@ghandalf result]$ rpmlint *.rpm mod_passenger.i386: W: no-documentation mod_passenger.i386: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/lib/httpd/modules/mod_passenger.so 0775 rubygem-passenger.i386: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/i386-linux/passenger/native_support.so 0775 rubygem-passenger.i386: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/passenger-2.0.6/lib/passenger/ApplicationPoolServerExecutable 0775 rubygem-passenger.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/passenger-2.0.6/bin/passenger-config rubygem-passenger.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/bin/passenger-config rubygem-passenger-devel.i386: W: no-documentation rubygem-passenger-doc.i386: W: no-documentation 6 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 5 warnings. - These I will fix as soon as I can, except for: rubygem-passenger.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/bin/passenger-config The file is not a devel file This is my first RPMFusion package I am a Fedora Packager: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/users/packages/kanarip -- 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.

13 years, 2 months

1
7
0 / 0

[Bug 1845] New: Review request: miro - Internet TV Player

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1845 Summary: Review request: miro - Internet TV Player Product: Package Reviews Version: Current Platform: All OS/Version: GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: Review Request AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org ReportedBy: michel+rpmf(a)sylvestre.me CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Blocks: 2 Estimated Hours: 0.0 Spec: http://salimma.fedorapeople.org/specs/media/miro.spec SRPM: http://salimma.fedorapeople.org/specs/media/miro-4.0.2-1.fc15.src.rpm Description: Miro is a free HD video player. It offers over 6,000 free internet TV shows and video podcasts, and has a simple interface designed for fullscreen HD video. It downloads most videos, allowing users to take their shows with them. Why not Fedora: This was previously maintained in Fedora, up to 3.5.x, but the new 4.x versions have a hard dependency on ffmpeg for format conversion; I am one of the Fedora maintainers, and as discussed with upstream and other Fedora comaintainers, we're moving the package to RPMfusion for now. rpmlint: on SRPM: $ rpmlint media/miro-4.0.2-1.fc15.src.rpm miro.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US podcasts -> podcast, pod casts, pod-casts miro.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US fullscreen -> full screen, full-screen, firescreen 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. These are correct spellings, just not in aspell's dictionary on binary: $ rpmlint ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/miro-4.0.2-1.fc15.x86_64.rpm miro.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US podcasts -> podcast, pod casts, pod-casts miro.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US fullscreen -> full screen, full-screen, firescreen miro.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/miro/plat/xlibhelper.so xlibhelper.so()(64bit) miro.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/miro/ngrams.so ngrams.so()(64bit) miro.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/miro/frontends/widgets/gtk/webkitgtkhacks.so webkitgtkhacks.so()(64bit) miro.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/miro/infolist.so infolist.so()(64bit) miro.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/miro/frontends/widgets/gtk/pygtkhacks.so pygtkhacks.so()(64bit) miro.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary miro-segmenter 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 8 warnings. Spelling "errors": same explanation Privae shared objects: common in Python arch-dependent packages Missing manual: the binary is normally used by the Miro program itself, though since it can also be used on the command line, perhaps it does not need to be moved to /usr/libexec $ rpmlint ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/miro-debuginfo-4.0.2-1.fc15.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. -- 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.

13 years, 2 months

1
33
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

rpmfusion-developers July 2011