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=480887 --- Comment #9 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil <oget.fedora@xxxxxxxxx> 2009-02-08 14:37:36 EDT --- (In reply to comment #8) > Ah, after reading http://musicxml.org/xml.html and > also this: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=357461 > and also your explanation: > > - This MusicXML document format license is free, GPL imcompatible > - However it seems that kguitar behaves just an interpreter or > editor for MusicXML document format license files. > > So there should no license issue for this package. Then: > Ok, so should I keep that MusicXML document license file in the %doc, or doesn't it matter? > * _texmf macro > - Isn't the following enough? > ------------------------------------------------------------- > %{!?_texmf: %define _texmf %(kpsewhich -expand-var '$TEXMFMAIN')} > ------------------------------------------------------------- > I forgot to fix this. There's already an RPM macro %{_texmf_main} provided by texlive-texmf package. I made the SPEC file to use that macro instead. > ! Versioning > - For svn based tarball, I prefer to include revision number > rather than the date I pulled the source because revision > number specifies the source used precisely, however > this is left to your choice. > I agree. Changed. > - By the way, would you tell me if this is after or before > 0.5.1 formal release? > This SVN snapshot includes some fixes that came *after* the 0.5.1 formal release. > * TeX dependency > - I think 30 Mbyte extra dependency is enough large. > Also I think that requiring another font for this package > should not be mandatory. > TeX related dependency should be split out. > I would choose "kguitar-tex" for TeX related subpackage. > I split the TeX bits into a subpackage. > * Timestamps > ------------------------------------------------------------- > touch -r %{name}/x-%{name}.desktop tmpfile > ------------------------------------------------------------- > - Is it really needed here to keep timestamps on this file? > You "actually" modified this desktop file here. > I was not thinking. Removed the timestamp conservation. > ? Desktop file location > - Is it needed that the desktop file is installed under > %_datadir/applications/kde, not under %_datadir/applications? > Such desktop files cannot be seem from GNOME, however > it seems that this application can be used also on GNOME. > I didn't know that the application won't be visible from gnome. I changed it to use %_datadir/applications. > * _docdir > - Files/directories under %_docdir are automatically marked > as %doc Removed the unnecessary %doc. Update: Spec URL: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/kguitar.spec SRPM URL: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/kguitar-0.5.1-3.926svn.fc10.src.rpm Changelog: 0.5.1-3.926svn - Change the EVR scheme (use svn revision instead of date in R) - Use RPM's _texmf_main macro instead of redefining it - Place the TeX bit into a -tex subpackage - Specfile cleanup -- 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. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review