https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3599 Antonio Trande <anto.trande(a)gmail.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |anto.trande(a)gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Antonio Trande <anto.trande(a)gmail.com&gt; 2015-09-30 20:09:02 CEST --- So why have you proposed older vdr-weatherforecast for Fedora and not directly this? This would create a name conflict between packages (that one on Fedora and that one on RPMFusion); you have two ways: First, retire vdr-weatherforecast on Fedora and package this one just on RPMFusion. Second, rename this package and maintain both of them. -- 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.

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3599 --- Comment #3 from Antonio Trande <anto.trande(a)gmail.com&gt; 2015-09-30 20:21:20 CEST --- (In reply to comment #2) I don't know; however, he should retire libskindesignerapi from RPMFusion. -- 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.

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3599 --- Comment #5 from Antonio Trande <anto.trande(a)gmail.com&gt; 2015-10-01 10:46:17 CEST --- (In reply to comment #4) There are inter-dependencies among vdr-* packages. I think it's better retiring older (still developed?) 'vdr-weatherforecast' from Fedora. It's not in Fedora. -- 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.

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3599 --- Comment #7 from Antonio Trande <anto.trande(a)gmail.com&gt; 2015-10-01 11:53:55 CEST --- (In reply to comment #6) https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life -- 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.

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3599 Antonio Trande <anto.trande(a)gmail.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Blocks|2 |3 AssignedTo|rpmfusion-package-review@rp |anto.trande(a)gmail.com |mfusion.org | --- Comment #9 from Antonio Trande <anto.trande(a)gmail.com&gt; 2015-10-03 12:43:37 CEST --- - 'vdr-plugin-weatherforecast-0.1.1/tools/curlfuncs.c' is involved in the compilation and licensed with BSD license. Please, add BSD to the License tag. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Package does not use a name that already exists. Note: A package with this name already exists. Please check https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/vdr-weatherforecast See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Conflicting_Pac... 'vdr-weatherforecast' was previously packaged for Fedora; it's now retired and moved to RPMFusion. ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "BSD (3 clause)", "Unknown or generated". 20 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/sagitter/vdr- weatherforecast/licensecheck.txt [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/vdr This directory is owned by dvr-devel. [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: The spec file handles locales properly. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 2 files. [!]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %license. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: No %config files under /usr. [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [ ]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro. [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s). Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Rpmlint ------- Checking: vdr-weatherforecast-0.1.1-1.fc24.i686.rpm vdr-weatherforecast-0.1.1-1.fc24.src.rpm vdr-weatherforecast.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US io -> oi, Io, ii vdr-weatherforecast.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US io -> oi, Io, ii 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: vdr-weatherforecast-debuginfo-0.1.1-1.fc24.i686.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- sh: /usr/bin/python: No such file or directory vdr-weatherforecast.i686: W: private-shared-object-provides /usr/lib/vdr/libvdr-weatherforecast.so.2.2.0 libvdr-weatherforecast.so.2.2.0 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. Requires -------- vdr-weatherforecast (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): config(vdr-weatherforecast) libc.so.6 libcurl.so.4 libgcc_s.so.1 libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0) libjansson.so.4 libm.so.6 libskindesignerapi.so.0 libstdc++.so.6 libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3) rtld(GNU_HASH) vdr(abi)(x86-32) Provides -------- vdr-weatherforecast: config(vdr-weatherforecast) libvdr-weatherforecast.so.2.2.0 vdr-weatherforecast vdr-weatherforecast(x86-32) Source checksums ---------------- http://projects.vdr-developer.org/git/vdr-plugin-weatherforecast.git/snap... : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 50046266fbd64b99dbcd14f12e7d67b2dd5662b4f978f1604c8fffc6c8c616d3 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 50046266fbd64b99dbcd14f12e7d67b2dd5662b4f978f1604c8fffc6c8c616d3 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-i386-rpmfusion_free -rn vdr-weatherforecast-0.1.1-1.fc21.src.rpm Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-i386 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++ Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6 -- 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.

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3599 --- Comment #11 from MartinKG <mgansser(a)alice.de&gt; 2015-10-03 13:25:52 CEST --- Spec URL: https://martinkg.fedorapeople.org/Review/SPECS/vdr-weatherforecast.spec SRPM URL: https://martinkg.fedorapeople.org/Review/SRPMS/vdr-weatherforecast-0.1.1-... %changelog * Sun Oct 03 2015 Martin Gansser <martinkg(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; - 0.1.1-2 - added BSD to the License tag -- 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.

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3599 --- Comment #13 from Antonio Trande <anto.trande(a)gmail.com&gt; 2015-10-03 14:50:12 CEST --- In the F23+ RPMFusion repositories, of course, as soon as the new infrastructure will be ready. -- 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.

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3599 MartinKG <mgansser(a)alice.de&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |33 --- Comment #15 from MartinKG <mgansser(a)alice.de&gt; 2016-01-06 14:11:08 CET --- @Antonio, thank you for the review. Package CVS request ====================== Package Name: vdr-weatherforecast Short Description: A VDR plugin which provides a weather forecast Owners: martinkg Branches: F-23, devel InitialCC: ---------------------- License tag: free -- 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.

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3599 Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart(a)gmail.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks|33 | -- 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.