[Bug 3335] New: Review Request: libde265 - Open H.265 video codec implementation

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3335 Bug #: 3335 Summary: Review Request: libde265 - Open H.265 video codec implementation Classification: Unclassified 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: mail(a)joachim-bauch.de CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Spec URL: http://www.joachim-bauch.de/static/fedora/libde265.spec SRPM URL: http://www.joachim-bauch.de/static/fedora/libde265-0.8-1.fc20.src.rpm Description: libde265 is an open source implementation of the H.265 video codec. It is written from scratch for simplicity and efficiency. Its simple API makes it easy to integrate it into other software. The package was rejected for Fedora (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1129691) because "HEVC implementations (of which h265 is one) have exactly the same legal problems as previous codecs backed by the MPEG consortium.". See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1129691 for further information. Feedback from comment #2 of that bug has been incorporated. This is my first RPM fusion package, I'm looking for somebody to review and sponsor it. rpmlint output for the RPMs: ----- $ rpmlint -i ../SRPMS/libde265-0.8-1.fc20.src.rpm libde265.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) codec -> codex, code, codes The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. libde265.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US codec -> codex, code, codes The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. -> "codec" is just fine for this. libde265.src: W: invalid-url Source0: https://github.com/strukturag/libde265/releases/download/v0.8/libde265-0.... HTTP Error 403: Forbidden The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL. -> This seems to be a bug in either rpmlint or on Github, I can download the package just fine with wget or curl. 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. ----- $ rpmlint -i ../RPMS/x86_64/libde265-0.8-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm libde265.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) codec -> codex, code, codes The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. libde265.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US codec -> codex, code, codes The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. -> see above 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. ----- $ rpmlint -i ../RPMS/x86_64/libde265-debuginfo-0.8-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. ----- $ rpmlint -i ../RPMS/x86_64/libde265-devel-0.8-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm libde265-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) codec -> codex, code, codes The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. libde265-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US codec -> codex, code, codes The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. -> see above libde265-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib There are only non binary files in /usr/lib so they should be in /usr/share. -> The arch-specific "pkginfo" file must be installed to /usr/lib*, so that's fine. 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. ----- $ rpmlint -i ../RPMS/x86_64/libde265-examples-0.8-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm libde265-examples.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) codec -> codex, code, codes The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. libde265-examples.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US codec -> codex, code, codes The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. -> see above libde265-examples.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary libde265-sherlock265 Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page. libde265-examples.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary libde265-dec265 Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page. -> As these are just simple examples, I didn't bother writing man pages yet. Both applications can print their usage information on the commandline. 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. ----- -- Configure bugmail: https://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.