[Bug 800930] Review Request: redeclipse - Multiplayer FPS game based on Cube2

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Sun Mar 11 16:34:36 UTC 2012


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=800930

--- Comment #18 from Martin Erik Werner <martinerikwerner at gmail.com> 2012-03-11 12:34:35 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #17)
> (In reply to comment #13)
> > (In reply to comment #12)
> > > You need a %doc entry in the %files section of the main package. Read this: 
> > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#Subpackage_Licensing
> > 
> > If this is enough, I'd be happy to remove the all-licenses file, however, I get
> > the impression that (paraphrasing license.txt)
> > "There are a whole bunch of individual licenses (some custom-written), dig
> > through the subfolders in order to find them"
> > ..is not really good enough, or is it?
> > 
> > Note that there are a few home-made licenses there as well, my comments in the
> > spec file only cover those which have a known shortname in Fedora.
> > 
> 
> Its really your call, if some of the maps/content etc are packaged under
> differing licenses from the main package you should consider sub-packaging
> those files if feasible and they can be contained. It could also set a
> precedent for future maps

I will not do this at this point in time at least, I think it would complicate
the packaging greatly, and make updating it a chore (content changing -> new
packages).
I mean, in that case I would package two images on one package, a sound file in
another, one map in one package and the rest in another package, if going just
based on licensing...

> 
> You should also uncomment the requires and remove the bundled enet. Write your
> spec as if the enet you require is available (looks like someone will be
> looking at this soon). if you have already an enet spec patch please attach it
> to the blocker if you haven't already

Ok, done

I do have a spec patch:
-Version:        1.2.1
-Release:        3%{?dist}
+Version:        1.3.3
+Release:        1%{?dist}
I figured it was not worth attaching.

spec URL: http://arand.fedorapeople.org/7/redeclipse.spec

-- 
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.



More information about the package-review mailing list