[Bug 478381] New: Review Request: sugar-tamtam-common - Resources and python libraries for Sugar TamTam activities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: sugar-tamtam-common - Resources and python libraries for Sugar TamTam activities
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478381
Summary: Review Request: sugar-tamtam-common - Resources and python libraries for Sugar TamTam activities Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: alsroot@member.fsf.org QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: http://people.sugarlabs.org/~alsroot/RPM/SPECS/sugar-tamtam-common.spec SRPM URL: http://people.sugarlabs.org/~alsroot/RPM/SRPMS/sugar-tamtam-common-52-1.2008...
Description: TamTam is a suite of four music and sound related activities for theSugar. TamTam is written in python with some C functions for speed-critical services.The audio engine for TamTam is Csound.
rpmlint claims for right group, but other sugar activities also use Sugar/Activities group
COPYING.txt says GPLv3 but TamTam*.activity/activity/activity.info says GPLv2+, so I use GPLv2+ in spec
package demands sugar* and olpcsound packages from updates-testing repo but current olpcsound has unmets, thus I built sugar*.src.rpm from updates-testing and used them from local repo
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478381
Aleksey Lim alsroot@member.fsf.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |177841
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478381
Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |pbrobinson@gmail.com Blocks| |462625
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478381
Fabian Affolter fabian@bernewireless.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |478382
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478381
Fabian Affolter fabian@bernewireless.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |478383
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478381
Fabian Affolter fabian@bernewireless.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |478385
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478381
Fabian Affolter fabian@bernewireless.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |478384
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478381
Fabian Affolter fabian@bernewireless.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fabian@bernewireless.net
--- Comment #1 from Fabian Affolter fabian@bernewireless.net 2009-01-27 18:50:05 EDT --- (In reply to comment #0)
COPYING.txt says GPLv3 but TamTam*.activity/activity/activity.info says GPLv2+, so I use GPLv2+ in spec
What did the upstream say about this?
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478381
--- Comment #2 from Aleksey Lim alsroot@altlinux.org 2009-02-05 10:59:10 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1)
(In reply to comment #0)
COPYING.txt says GPLv3 but TamTam*.activity/activity/activity.info says GPLv2+, so I use GPLv2+ in spec
What did the upstream say about this?
the right licence is GPLv3+, now I'm waiting for authors' decision about merging branch(my packages based on) to trunk, after that I'm going re-upload all TamTam packages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478381
Aleksey Lim alsroot@altlinux.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |WONTFIX
--- Comment #3 from Aleksey Lim alsroot@altlinux.org 2009-03-23 05:54:19 EDT --- since all honey activities should be installed from ASLO and distros provide only http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Development_Team/Sugar_Platform/0.84 I'm closing this bug
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478381
Jason Tibbitts tibbs@math.uh.edu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Red Hat Bugzilla