Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: Farstream - Libraries for videoconferencing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=797694
Summary: Review Request: Farstream - Libraries for videoconferencing Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: bdpepple@gmail.com QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: ---
Spec URL: http://bpepple.fedorapeople.org/rpms/farstream.spec SRPM URL: http://bpepple.fedorapeople.org/rpms/farstream-0.1.1-1.fc16.src.rpm Description: Farstream is a collection of GStreamer modules and libraries for videoconferencing.
Scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3821200
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=797694
Brian Pepple bdpepple@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |755727
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=797694
Bill Nottingham notting@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |notting@redhat.com Flag| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Bill Nottingham notting@redhat.com 2012-02-28 14:00:57 EST --- - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines - OK - Spec file matches base package name. - OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. - OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. - OK - License - LGPLv2+ - License field in spec matches - OK - License file included in package - OK - Spec in American English - OK - Spec is legible. - OK - Sources match upstream md5sum: - OK 1b10c6f735f05b5c6f77753036daa3940de8284b farstream-0.1.1.tar.gz
- Package needs ExcludeArch - N/A - BuildRequires correct - OK (it builds, at least) - Spec handles locales/find_lang - N/A - Package is code or permissible content. - OK - Doc subpackage needed/used. - OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. - OK
- Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage. - OK - Spec has needed ldconfig in post and postun - OK - .pc files in -devel subpackage/requires pkgconfig - OK - .so files in -devel subpackage. - OK - -devel package Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} - ***
Need %{?_isa} appended.
- .la files are removed. - OK
- Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. - tested x86_64 OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. - OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. - OK - Package owns all the directories it creates. - OK - No rpmlint output.
farstream.src:23: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 6, tab: line 23) farstream-python.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/farstream.so farstream.so()(64bit) farstream-python.x86_64: W: no-documentation 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
Fixing the first (mixed spaces & tabs) is nice. The others are ignoreable.
- final provides and requires are sane - OK, looks good.
SHOULD Items:
- Should build in mock. - tested x86_64 on F16 - Should function as described. - didn't test - Should have sane scriptlets. - OK - Should have subpackages require base package with fully versioned depend. - see above - Should have dist tag - OK - Should package latest version - OK
Issues:
1. spec has: --with-package-origin='http://download.fedora.redhat.com/fedora' \ You want download.fedoraproject.org. d.f.r.c is no more. 2. Need %{?_isa} appended to %{name} in -devel package requirements 3. Spaces & tabs mixed in the spec file.
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=797694
--- Comment #2 from Bill Nottingham notting@redhat.com 2012-02-28 14:42:36 EST --- 4. farstream-devel should obsolete/provide farsight2-devel
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=797694
--- Comment #3 from Bill Nottingham notting@redhat.com 2012-02-28 14:54:37 EST --- Also, it appears to require a version of gstreamer-plugins-bad-free that doesn't exist.
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=797694
--- Comment #4 from Brian Pepple bdpepple@gmail.com 2012-02-28 19:05:08 EST --- Spec URL: http://bpepple.fedorapeople.org/rpms/farstream.spec SRPM URL: http://bpepple.fedorapeople.org/rpms/farstream-0.1.1-2.fc16.src.rpm
Spec file diff: http://bpepple.fedorapeople.org/rpms/spec.diff
* Tue Feb 28 2012 Brian Pepple bpepple@fedoraproject.org - 0.1.1-2 - Appended isa macro to name in devel subpackage. - Add obsolete/provide to devel subpackage. - Correct package origin url.
You're correct that gstreamer-plugins-bad-free needs to be updated to the most recent version before this package can be built in Fedora. Hopefully, I'll get to that tonight, tho mostly it will be tomorrow.
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=797694
Bill Nottingham notting@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #5 from Bill Nottingham notting@redhat.com 2012-02-29 10:44:53 EST --- Looks good. APPROVED. Please don't build it without broken deps, obviously.
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=797694
--- Comment #6 from Bill Nottingham notting@redhat.com 2012-02-29 10:45:24 EST --- *with.
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=797694
Brian Pepple bdpepple@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #7 from Brian Pepple bdpepple@gmail.com 2012-02-29 20:52:19 EST --- New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: farstream Short Libraries for videoconferencing Owners: bpepple Branches: f17 InitialCC
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=797694
--- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com 2012-03-01 21:23:14 EST --- Badly misformatted request, please correct.
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=797694
Brian Pepple bdpepple@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #9 from Brian Pepple bdpepple@gmail.com 2012-03-01 21:34:52 EST --- Is due to not having the word description?
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: farstream Short Description: Libraries for videoconferencing Owners: bpepple Branches: f17 InitialCC
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=797694
--- Comment #10 from Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com 2012-03-02 07:59:13 EST --- That was part of it. It still thinks you want 'InitialCC' as a branch, but I can work around that. My larger concern is that the name in the SCM request and summary don't match, should it be capitalized or not?
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=797694
Brian Pepple bdpepple@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #11 from Brian Pepple bdpepple@gmail.com 2012-03-02 13:13:29 EST --- Lowercase as the tarball & specfile is. Upstream refers to it capitalized in the titles of e-mails (1). Hence, I did the same in the summary. Anyway, the information in the request is how it should be set-up.
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: farstream Short Description: Libraries for videoconferencing Owners: bpepple Branches: f17 InitialCC:
(1) http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/farstream-devel/2012-February/000002.h...
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=797694
--- Comment #12 from Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com 2012-03-02 13:28:56 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests).
Gotcha, thanks!
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=797694
--- Comment #13 from Brian Pepple bdpepple@gmail.com 2012-03-04 17:16:16 EST --- Imported package into git, but will hold off on building until tp-farstream (bug #755727) is also approved, otherwise we'll run into problems with obsoletes/provides.
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=797694
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |MODIFIED
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=797694
--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-06 14:21:28 EST --- empathy-3.3.91-1.fc17,telepathy-farstream-0.2.1-2.fc17,farstream-0.1.1-4.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/empathy-3.3.91-1.fc17,telepathy-fars...
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=797694
--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-10 19:57:08 EST --- pidgin-2.10.1-4.fc17,papyon-0.5.6-3.fc17,farstream-0.1.1-4.fc17,telepathy-farstream-0.2.2-1.fc17,empathy-3.3.91-2.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pidgin-2.10.1-4.fc17,papyon-0.5.6-3....
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=797694
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |CLOSED Fixed In Version| |telepathy-farstream-0.2.2-2 | |.fc17 Resolution| |ERRATA Last Closed| |2012-03-16 17:12:44
--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-16 17:12:44 EDT --- telepathy-farstream-0.2.2-2.fc17, farstream-0.1.1-5.fc17, amsn-0.98.4-10.fc17, pidgin-2.10.1-4.fc17, papyon-0.5.6-3.fc17, empathy-3.3.91-2.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org