[Bug 509160] Review Request: mine_detector – a mine-finding game

Tue Jan 26 08:41:44 UTC 2010

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=509160

--- Comment #11 from Björn Persson <bjorn at xn--rombobjrn-67a.se> 2010-01-26 03:41:39 EST ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> It's weird that it doesn't touch %{SOURCE3} during %prep or %build. it only
> shows up in %install.   I would expect that to be copied into the build areas
> during %prep, then copy it out during %install.  By the time you hit %install I
> expect that only the files in the build would be read from, and that writes
> would generally only write to (install to) the buildroot.  That could be a real
> issue if rpmbuild were modified in the future to enforce that... could you
> change it?

It seemed a bit silly to copy the file in two steps when one step worked just
as well, but if it's more future-proof, then I'll do it that way.

(In reply to comment #10)
> ISSUE: Need to confirm that you've asked upstream to include a separate file
> with the license in a future edition.
[...]
> ISSUE: The package did NOT include a separate license file, and you've ADDED
> one.  I don't think that meets this requirement.  If there isn't one, then
> don't add one.  Instead, just ask upstream to (in the future) add one.

There was supposed to be a license file. It was included with version 5 but was
left out from version 6 by mistake. Jeffrey Carter said it was a mistake and
gave me permission to use the file from version 5. I'm sure he'll include it in
the next version. (Unless he forgets it again of course.) I figure it's similar
to backporting a bugfix: We carry the fix as a patch until the next version is
released with the fix included. The license file isn't in diff format as it's a
whole file, but it corrects a mistake in the upstream release like a patch
does.

Here's the relevant email conversation:

------------------------

From: PragmAda Software Engineering <pragmada at pragmada.x10hosting.com>
To: Bjorn at rombobeorn.se
Subject: PragmAda Announcements

FYI, here's a copy of a msg I posted on Team-Ada and c.l.a mentioning you:

1. The PragmAda Software Engineering web site has moved. You may now
find it at

http://pragmada.x10hosting.com/

2. The e-mail address for PragmAda has also changed. It is now

pragmada at pragmada.x10hosting.com

3. There is a new, source-only version of Mine Detector. V6.0 is
functionally identical to V5.0, but builds with GtkAda 2.8, 2.10, and
2.14 (tested on Linux only). Thanks to Pascal Malaise and Björn Persson
for suggestions about the changes needed. The actual changes in V6.0
were made by Pascal Malaise.

Mine Detector is at

http://pragmada.x10hosting.com/mindet.html

-- 
Jeffrey R. Carter, President
PragmAda Software Engineering

------------------------

From: Björn Persson <bjorn at rombobjörn.se>
To: PragmAda Software Engineering <pragmada at pragmada.x10hosting.com>
Subject: Re: PragmAda Announcements

söndagen den 2 augusti 2009 23:07:23 skrev du:
> FYI, here's a copy of a msg I posted on Team-Ada and c.l.a mentioning you:
>
> 1. The PragmAda Software Engineering web site has moved. You may now
> find it at
>
> http://pragmada.x10hosting.com/
>
> 2. The e-mail address for PragmAda has also changed. It is now
>
> pragmada at pragmada.x10hosting.com
>
> 3. There is a new, source-only version of Mine Detector. V6.0 is
> functionally identical to V5.0, but builds with GtkAda 2.8, 2.10, and
> 2.14 (tested on Linux only). Thanks to Pascal Malaise and Björn Persson
> for suggestions about the changes needed. The actual changes in V6.0
> were made by Pascal Malaise.
>
> Mine Detector is at
>
> http://pragmada.x10hosting.com/mindet.html

Thanks for notifying me. I will update my Fedora packages (which are currently 
waiting in the review queue).

Have you removed license.txt on purpose? The Fedora project prefers to have a 
license file in every package, and wants me to ask you to include one. It's OK 
to say no, but since you had a license file I'm curious to know why you removed 
it.

Björn Persson

------------------------

From: PragmAda Software Engineering <pragmada at pragmada.x10hosting.com>
To: Björn Persson <bjorn at rombobjörn.se>
Subject: Re: PragmAda Announcements

Björn Persson wrote:
> 
> Have you removed license.txt on purpose? The Fedora project prefers to have a 
> license file in every package, and wants me to ask you to include one. It's OK 
> to say no, but since you had a license file I'm curious to know why you removed 
> it.

No, I just forgot to include it. You may reuse the one in V5.0.

-- 
Jeffrey R. Carter, President
PragmAda Software Engineering

------------------------

So, now that you have all the information, do you still think I should package
Mine Detector without the license file?

> WARNING: The URL given here has an UNCHANGING version value:
>  http://pragmada.x10hosting.com/mine_detector_6.0_src.zip
> I recommend doing this instead:
>  http://pragmada.x10hosting.com/mine_detector_%{version}_src.zip
> This way, updating the RPM spec is far easier.  Otherwise, it'll be easy to
> change the "version:" value, but not change the URL: entry and get the wrong
> source file.

Yeah well, Jeffrey's site has jumped around a few times. As you can see above
he moved it to a new domain at the same time as he released Mine Detector 6. If
he moves it again I'll have to change the URL anyway, and it's much easier to
copy the URL and download the zipfile if you don't have to do macro
substitution by hand. This was a choice I made but it's no big deal. I can use
the macro if you want me to.

> ISSUE. It does NOT include a man page.  Have you queried upstream?    

No. There was no written policy on man pages when I last touched this package.
I suppose I could learn the basics of writing man pages and then make one, but
I don't see that it could become more than a stub. Mine Detector has no
configuration and takes no command line parameters. All the instructions you
need are displayed when you press the "Rules" button, and I don't see a point
in duplicating that text in a man page.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.