Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: navit - Car navigation system with routing engine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=654374
Summary: Review Request: navit - Car navigation system with routing engine Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: vijivijayakumar@gmail.com QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: http://viji.fedorapeople.org/SPECS/navit.spec SRPM URL: http://viji.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/navit-0.1.2-0.4.20101117svn3684.fc14.src....
Description: Navit is a car navigation system with routing engine. Its modular design is capable of using vector maps of various formats for routing and rendering of the displayed map. It's even possible to use multiple maps at a time.
The GTK+ or SDL user interfaces are designed to work well with touch screen displays. Points of Interest of various formats are displayed on the map.
The current vehicle position is either read from 'gpsd' or directly from NMEA GPS sensors.
The routing engine not only calculates an optimal route to your destination, but also generates directions and even speaks to you.
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=654374
Jason Tibbitts tibbs@math.uh.edu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fabian@bernewireless.net
--- Comment #1 from Jason Tibbitts tibbs@math.uh.edu 2010-11-17 13:12:32 EST --- *** Bug 485652 has been marked as a duplicate of 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=654374
--- Comment #2 from viji vijivijayakumar@gmail.com 2010-11-17 13:15:31 EST --- $ rpmlint ../SRPMS/navit-0.1.2-0.4.20101117svn3684.fc14.src.rpm
navit.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gpsd -> Gypsy, gypsy, gramps navit.src: W: invalid-url Source0: http://downloads.sourceforge.net/navit/navit-3684.tar.bz2 HTTP Error 404: Not Found 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
$ rpmlint ../RPMS/x86_64/navit-0.1.2-0.4.20101117svn3684.fc14.x86_64.rpm navit.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gpsd -> Gypsy, gypsy, gramps 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
$ rpmlint ../RPMS/x86_64/navit-graphics-sdl-0.1.2-0.4.20101117svn3684.fc14.x86_64.rpm navit-graphics-sdl.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xml -> XML, cml, ml navit-graphics-sdl.x86_64: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
$ rpmlint ../RPMS/x86_64/navit-graphics-qt-0.1.2-0.4.20101117svn3684.fc14.x86_64.rpm navit-graphics-qt.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xml -> XML, cml, ml navit-graphics-qt.x86_64: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
I am not sure what to do with the "invalid-url" warning, the package is an svn checkout.
F14 Scratch ----------- http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2606951
F13 Scratch ----------- http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2606966
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=654374
viji vijivijayakumar@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |michel+fdr@michelsylvain.in | |fo See Also| |https://bugzilla.redhat.com | |/show_bug.cgi?id=485652
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=654374
Valent Turkovic valent.turkovic@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |valent.turkovic@gmail.com
--- Comment #3 from Valent Turkovic valent.turkovic@gmail.com 2010-11-20 15:30:27 EST --- When will Navit package be in Fedora 14 repos?
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=654374
--- Comment #4 from viji vijivijayakumar@gmail.com 2010-11-20 15:39:18 EST --- I have contacted my mentor to review this package, he is out of town for couple of days (mostly it will be done by Monday)
If everything goes fine will push to testing and then stable. May be two weeks from now you can do a "yum install navit"
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=654374
Michel Alexandre Salim michel+fdr@michelsylvain.info changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |michel+fdr@michelsylvain.in | |fo Flag| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #5 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel+fdr@michelsylvain.info 2010-11-26 05:40:26 EST --- Hi Viji,
We need the instructions to generate the tarball to have reproducible results; so the safest way is to use the particular VCS's archiving functionality, *and* specify the desired revision.
In this case, the following works:
svn co https://navit.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/navit/trunk/navit (cd navit ; svn export -r %%{svn} . ../%{name}-%%{svn}) tar cvjf %%{name}-%%{svn}.tar.bz2 %%{name}-%%{svn}
and adjust the %dirname accordingly; I had to add %{svn} otherwise it conflicts with either the directory created by the checkout (navit) or the ./navit subdirectory inside it -- it's quite annoying that SVN does not let one output directly to stdout, and thus just pipe it directly to tar without having to create a temporary directory on the FS!
Right now, the MD5sums don't match between your tarball and the one I generate (even if I output to a directory called "navit" without the SVN revision). Creating the archive using svn export, while not guaranteed, would probably be more reliable as the files would be exported in the same order, and so hopefully the filesystem will list it in the same order for tar! Not as good as being able to just stream the output to tar, definitely.
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=654374
--- Comment #6 from viji vijivijayakumar@gmail.com 2010-11-26 05:49:14 EST --- I will be removing this "svn co" completely as the upstream released 0.2.0 day before yesterday. Will be moving to the same.
will update the srpm and spec in a while.
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=654374
--- Comment #8 from viji vijivijayakumar@gmail.com 2010-11-26 14:38:23 EST --- I have contacted the upstream developers and they are asking re-licensing the same to GPLv2+ would be sufficient or not..
There are some compiling issues, working on it, will be updating the new package soon.
Thank you so much for your support
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=654374
--- Comment #9 from viji vijivijayakumar@gmail.com 2010-11-26 15:12:28 EST --- I have contacted the upstream developers and they are asking re-licensing the same to GPLv2+ would be sufficient or not..
There are some compiling issues, working on it, will be updating the new package soon.
Thank you so much for your support
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=654374
--- Comment #10 from viji vijivijayakumar@gmail.com 2010-11-26 15:57:12 EST --- Updated the packages, please review.
Spec URL: http://viji.fedorapeople.org/SPECS/navit.spec SRPM URL : http://viji.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/navit-0.2.0-1.fc14.src.rpm
F14 Scratch ----------- http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2628765
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=654374
Ralf Corsepius rc040203@freenet.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |rc040203@freenet.de
--- Comment #11 from Ralf Corsepius rc040203@freenet.de 2010-11-27 01:20:56 EST --- Not a formal review, just some comments.
* I am not sure whether bundling this sample-map is a good idea, because most users will want to remove it and replace it with a map which suites their needs
i.e. I'd propose to either * entirely remove this map from this package. * package it as a separate package. * package it as a "noarch" subpackage of navit.
* I am observing an inpressive amount of warnings when running navit, similar to this one: navit:displayitem_draw:failed to load icon '/usr/share/navit/xpm/parking.png'
* Your package contains a larger number of *la's. Are they really needed? I haven't checked, but I am having doubts.
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=654374
--- Comment #12 from viji vijivijayakumar@gmail.com 2010-11-27 03:23:45 EST --- @Michel
Please ignore the previous spec file and SRPM, I mean the upstream release (0.2.0). We need to use the latest SVN export itself as the 0.2.0 release has many issue with qt, it breaks.
I will be updating a new spec file and srpm with the svn export, the "svn" related issues which you have mentioned will be taken care of.
Thank you so much.
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=654374
--- Comment #13 from viji vijivijayakumar@gmail.com 2010-11-27 03:26:58 EST --- @Ralf
Thank you so much for your suggestions, I will defiantly have a look at it. I am updating the same to the latest svn export as this release has many issues with qt.
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=654374
--- Comment #14 from viji vijivijayakumar@gmail.com 2010-11-28 13:11:32 EST --- Bumped to the latest SVN, 0.5.0.
Please do the review and let me know your comments
Spec URL: http://viji.fedorapeople.org/SPECS/navit.spec
SRPM URL: http://viji.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/navit-0.5.0-0.1.20101128svn3732.fc14.src....
Koji F14 Scratch ---------------- http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2630789
Issues which Ralf pointed out:
- The map can be on a different package, but I would suggest for the time being we will keep this sample maps as a part of the main package itself so that we can identify the bugs quickly, Eg: icon issues. Also, if we are providing a map data then we need to think about what else can be provided with it and some samples needs to be there for testing.
- The icon issues are fixed, this is not a complete fix. The navit icons comes in different formats, xpm, svg and png. The default /etc/navit/navit.xml has some issues with the file name/format. If you face any issues just check the icon folder and replace the same with the one which is available in navit.xml. This is actually not a bug.
- The .la files are required
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=654374
--- Comment #15 from viji vijivijayakumar@gmail.com 2010-11-28 13:58:57 EST --- I mean:
- The .la files are NOT required.
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=654374
--- Comment #16 from viji vijivijayakumar@gmail.com 2010-11-30 06:00:59 EST --- Regarding espeak:
The integrated espeak is only used for win32 or wince. On linux navit just calls the espeak binary. It is automatically disabled on Linux also. Do we really need to think about the re-licensing here?
Also, They upstream guys are not that much happy with GPLv2+, FSF could release a GPLv4 with conditions which they may not like. They are working towards a clean solution, considering
- Re-licensing navit with GPLv2 or GPLv3. - Using a downgraded GPLv2 espeak library
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=654374
--- Comment #17 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel+fdr@michelsylvain.info 2010-12-04 14:45:34 EST --- In fact the .la files should be stripped.
I do notice that espeak support is disabled by default anyway, so in that case, no, it's not a problem for *us* (at least at the moment). It's still proper to let upstream know, especially because, since they do turn it on for Win32/WinCE that means those packages are technically illegal!
They don't need to do GPLv2+ -- the other alternatives if they want to use espeak by default on some platforms is to either switch to GPLv3 (only), or dual-license with GPLv2/GPLv3 (if the GPLv3 terms are acceptable, and they just worry about what GPLv4 might look like). *Or* ask espeak to grant them an exception.
Again, GPL-based libraries meant for linking against are just *evil*
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=654374
--- Comment #18 from viji vijivijayakumar@gmail.com 2010-12-05 01:11:01 EST --- The .la files are being removed already.
I have informed the upstream regarding espeak, waiting for a clean solution.
How do we go ahead now? Can we continue with review?
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=654374
--- Comment #19 from viji vijivijayakumar@gmail.com 2010-12-05 15:09:53 EST --- Spec URL: http://viji.fedorapeople.org/SPECS/navit.spec
SRPM URL: http://viji.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/navit-0.5.0-0.1.20101128svn3732.fc14.src....
Koji F14 Scratch ---------------- http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2630789
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=654374
--- Comment #20 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel+fdr@michelsylvain.info 2010-12-05 16:34:49 EST --- Package seems almost ready, with one major issue and several minor ones remaining.
Major: source tarball does not match result of SVN export. The reordering is not a big deal, but the checkout I get uses lowercase is_nan whereas yours use uppercase is_nan. Since this is referred to in the patch files, it probably should be fixed
(The file ordering problem can probably only be fixed by using git-svn instead of svn, and then using git archive instead of svn export, but as long as the recursive diff matches I'd consider the source tarball to match)
Minor: incomplete directory ownership. See below.
* TODO Review [54%] ** DONE Names [3/3] *** DONE Package name *** DONE Spec name *** DONE Package version [2/2] **** DONE Version number **** DONE Release tag ** DONE Meets [[http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines%5D%5Bguidelines]] ** FAIL Source files match upstream Contents do not match: $ diff -ru navit-3732 ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/navit-3732 diff -ru navit-3732/navit/vehicle/gpsd_dbus/vehicle_gpsd_dbus.c /home/michel/rpmbuild/SOURCES/navit-3732/navit/vehicle/gpsd_dbus/vehicle_gpsd_dbus.c --- navit-3732/navit/vehicle/gpsd_dbus/vehicle_gpsd_dbus.c 2010-11-22 15:51:07.994297000 +0100 +++ /home/michel/rpmbuild/SOURCES/navit-3732/navit/vehicle/gpsd_dbus/vehicle_gpsd_dbus.c 2010-11-28 09:11:53.000000000 +0100 @@ -86,9 +86,9 @@ priv->geo.lat=latitude; priv->geo.lng=longitude; } - if (!is_nan(track)) + if (!is_NaN(track)) priv->track=track; - if (!is_nan(speed)) + if (!is_NaN(speed)) priv->speed=speed; if (!isnan(altitude)) priv->altitude=altitude;
** TODO [[http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries%5D%5BNo bundled libraries]]
** DONE License [4/4] *** DONE License is Fedora-approved *** DONE No licensing conflict Remember not to enable espeak support *** DONE License field accurate *** DONE License included iff packaged by upstream ** TODO rpmlint [/] *** TODO on src.rpm $ rpmlint ~/Downloads/navit-0.5.0-0.1.20101128svn3732.fc14.src.rpm navit.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gpsd -> Gypsy, gypsy, gramps navit.src:6: W: macro-in-comment %{name} => can be ignored
navit.src:17: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 17) => should be fixed
navit.src: W: invalid-url Source0: http://downloads.sourceforge.net/navit/navit-3732.tar.bz2 HTTP Error 404: Not Found => probably comment out this Source line when using a snapshot tarball
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.
*** TODO on x86_64.rpm $ rpmlint ~/Downloads/navit-*.x86_64*.rpm navit.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gpsd -> Gypsy, gypsy, gramps navit-graphics-qt.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xml -> XML, cml, ml navit-graphics-qt.x86_64: W: no-documentation navit-graphics-sdl.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xml -> XML, cml, ml navit-graphics-sdl.x86_64: W: no-documentation 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings.
=> All harmless
** DONE Language & locale [3/3] *** DONE Spec in US English *** DONE Spec legible *** DONE Use %find_lang to handle locale files ** TODO Build [2/3] *** DONE Koji results *** DONE BRs complete *** FAIL Directory ownership - Nobody owns %dir %{_sysconfdir}/navit - Should Require: hicolor-icon-theme for /usr/share/icons ** TODO Spec inspection [8/9] *** N/A ldconfig for libraries *** DONE No duplicate files *** DONE File permissions *** DONE Filenames must be UTF-8 *** WAIT no BuildRoot ([[https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag%5D%5Bexcep... if targeting EPEL5]]) BuildRoot can be removed, but it's harmless *** DONE Has %clean section (except F-13+: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#.25clean) *** DONE %buildroot cleaned on %install *** DONE Macro usage consistent *** DONE Other subpackages ** DONE Desktop file validation ** DONE [[http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets%5D%5BScriptlets]] [4/4] *** N/A desktop-database (desktop entry has MimeType) *** DONE icon cache (icons in %{_datadir}/icons/) *** N/A info files *** N/A mimeinfo (file in %{_datadir}/mime/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=654374
--- Comment #21 from Ralf Corsepius rc040203@freenet.de 2010-12-05 22:52:26 EST --- Further remarks:
- tarballs contains an uses a bundled library: navit/fib-1.1 Googling for it indicates nobody is shipping this library.
- the svn snapshot tarballs contain bundled libraries and java binaries (android java, licensed Apache-2.0 == GPLv2 incompatible) => Your source tarballs are non-GPLv2 compatible
- the svn snapshot tarballs contain a copy of the Liberation-fonts. == unnecessary bloat
The official stable source tarball doesn't contain the android code nor the liberation fonts. Therefore, I am inclined to think your snapshot tarballs are improperly cut or upstream might be heading an unhealthy development direction.
That said, I can't avoid to ask a direct question: Why are you trying to package an unstable developments branch instead of what upstream calls "stable"?
Finally: Package still contains the sample map.
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=654374
--- Comment #22 from viji vijivijayakumar@gmail.com 2010-12-06 14:34:21 EST --- Michel,
Thank you so much for your review. Will update the ticket with the new spec and srpm after fixing all the issues mentioned.
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=654374
--- Comment #23 from viji vijivijayakumar@gmail.com 2010-12-06 14:39:14 EST --- Ralf,
Thank you so much for your observations. The tarball is just an svn checkout, no repackaging. The files you have mentioned are included by the upstream. Anyway I will check it and discuss with them, also will compare with the latest SVN.
Hope you have gone through my previous comments and change-logs, the reason behind the SVN version:
- The stable branch is not that much "stable" with all supported Fedora versions like 13/14/15, specifically qt breaks. - The bug fixes are been made to SVN and not porting properly back to the stable release. - Navit upstream also recommend to use the SVN version - Since this project is very rapidly evolving users are very keen to test the latest features and enhancements.
Conclusion: Will Switch back to stable after 1.0 release.
Maps are not on a separate package now, because:
- For quick testing, navit is very rapidly evolving. - People expect to see "some" maps quickly after the installation - The maps directory contains the POI icons as well, in different formats - xpm, svg, png etc, need to differentiate and repack all of them properly
Conclusion: Up to 1.0 we will keep this in the same package
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=654374
--- Comment #24 from Ralf Corsepius rc040203@freenet.de 2010-12-06 23:23:18 EST --- (In reply to comment #23)
Ralf,
Thank you so much for your observations. The tarball is just an svn checkout, no repackaging.
Then let me rephrase it: Your tarballs violate the GPLv2.
The files you have mentioned are included by the upstream.
Right, but it's you who is tarring up their sources.
Anyway I will check it and discuss with them, also will compare with the latest SVN.
There actually are several issues at once: - Them shipping Apache-v2-licensed works (android) bundled with GPLv2 licenced works violates the GPLv2. - Them bundling fonts and android code is a mistake.
Hope you have gone through my previous comments and change-logs, the reason behind the SVN version:
- The stable branch is not that much "stable" with all supported Fedora
versions like 13/14/15, specifically qt breaks.
- The bug fixes are been made to SVN and not porting properly back to the
stable release.
- Navit upstream also recommend to use the SVN version
- Since this project is very rapidly evolving users are very keen to test the
latest features and enhancements.
Conclusion: Will Switch back to stable after 1.0 release.
My conclusion: ATM, this package is too immature for inclusion into a distro.
Maps are not on a separate package now, because:
- For quick testing, navit is very rapidly evolving.
Seems as if we are facing a miscommunication: I want you to package them as a noarch _subpackage_ of navit.
(With my FPC head on) You currently are shipping a big, optional data file as part of an application package.
- People expect to see "some" maps quickly after the installation
Yes, the way upstream currently is shipping maps is not really useful. They need to do something about it.
- The maps directory contains the POI icons as well, in different formats -
xpm, svg, png etc, need to differentiate and repack all of them properly
Again, I am talking about the actual map file.
Conclusion: Up to 1.0 we will keep this in the same package
Under these circumstances, you can consider this review failed.
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=654374
--- Comment #25 from viji vijivijayakumar@gmail.com 2010-12-06 23:43:27 EST --- We need this package in the distro, as there is a huge amount of work is going on to have a "Geo" spin for Fedora 15. There are many people interested to see this package in Fedora, just check the "CC" list of this bug, OSGeo mailing list, Fedora mail thread - "Fedora 15 exciting plans". The upstream guys are very responsive and fixing the bugs quickly, so far there is no "instability" reported regarding the "svn" package.
Regarding the GPL violations, I will remove these "violating" stuffs and repack them properly. Let me check the comments from upstream guys also.
The maps can be on a separate sub-package, will do it on the next review-update
Can I go ahead with the changes and review?
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=654374
--- Comment #26 from Ralf Corsepius rc040203@freenet.de 2010-12-07 12:00:43 EST --- (In reply to comment #25)
We need this package in the distro, as there is a huge amount of work is going on to have a "Geo" spin for Fedora 15.
Well, many kids want a pony, but ...
There are many people interested to see this package in Fedora, just check the "CC" list of this bug,
I am interested, too, however, the unpleasant truth is, this package has a lot of issues which _need_ to be resolved before it can go into Fedora.
#1 issue is upstream's apparent carelessness about legal issues (A simple solution would be them to license their works under GPLv2+ or GPLv3), #2 issue is this package's apparent immaturity.
The maps can be on a separate sub-package, will do it on the next review-update
Thanks.
Can I go ahead with the changes and review?
Certainly.
The next think you could do is to try working around the legal issues on your part, by refining your tarball cutting procedure (exclude the android code, exclude the fonts; If necessary, patch the sources to make them buildable without these subdirs in place.)
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=654374
Ralf Corsepius rc040203@freenet.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |DEFERRED Status Whiteboard| |stalledsubmitter Last Closed| |2011-06-04 06:09:34
--- Comment #27 from Ralf Corsepius rc040203@freenet.de 2011-06-04 06:09:34 EDT --- Closing - No activity from submitter for almost half a year.
In case you're still interested, feel encouraged to resubmit another review request or to reopen this one.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Red Hat Bugzilla