Bug ID | 5244 |
---|---|
Summary | Review Request: xmltv - A set of utilities to manage your TV viewing |
Product | Package Reviews |
Version | Current |
Hardware | x86_64 |
OS | GNU/Linux |
Status | NEW |
Severity | enhancement |
Priority | P1 |
Component | Review Request |
Assignee | rpmfusion-package-review@rpmfusion.org |
Reporter | gary.buhrmaster@gmail.com |
CC | rpmfusion-package-review@rpmfusion.org |
namespace | free |
Note: This is actually more of a new packager request more than a true new package. The xmltv package already exists in the repo. Previous discussions on this are in bugzilla #5214, where it was suggested I create a new package review request. Done! Note: This is my first RPMFusion package. Note: I am seeking a sponsor to become a packager. SPEC file: https://www.dropbox.com/s/c65qs5s2uar5inp/xmltv.spec?dl=0 SRPM file: https://www.dropbox.com/s/yd8xg5fcb5vk2o3/xmltv-0.6.1-4.fc30.src.rpm?dl=0 Description: XMLTV is a set of utilities to manage your TV viewing. They work with TV listings stored in the XMLTV format, which is based on XML. The idea is to separate out the backend (getting the listings) from the frontend (displaying them for the user), and to implement useful operations like picking out your favourite programmes as filters that read and write XML documents. Why not in Fedora: This package cannot be allowed in Fedora since it can retrieve information from websites and thus could possibly violate EULA. rpmlint output from SPEC file: 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. rpmlint output from src file: xmltv.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US frontend -> fronted, front end, front-end xmltv.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US favourite -> favorite, favoritism xmltv.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US programmes -> programmed, programmers, programmer 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. These (which are the same for the existing package) are representative of the upstreams UK English origins and usages, and are typically accepted as valid alternatives in US English.