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=226210 --- Comment #25 from Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@xxxxxxxxx> 2009-07-03 09:35:16 EDT --- > Anyhow, I'll ask for the 4th time (comments #6, #10, #17 and #24): AFAICS the only things I didn't directly address directly are as follows: Comment #6 > At least the license file can get into this. > opal-devel.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided openh323-devel Fixed in cvs as of Jan 6th > Is openh323 compatible with opal? If yes, you should provide it. No, its not compatible. > * Please package the docs directory. I think it makes more sense to put it in > the -devel package. Fixed in cvs as of Jan 6th > * Shall we package samples and plugins (possibly in different subpackages)? > Note that some plugins have different licenses. Possibly but there's never been a request for them, alot of the samples don't work well so they end up causing more issues than their contribute. Comment #10 > Ok, How about the samples? See comment above. > Btw, currently the "MPEG4 Part 2" plugin is disabled for obvious reasons. Shall > we include it in a freeworld package at rpmfusion? Is there any benefit in > that? Possibly but out of scope for this. Comment #17 Already addressed in other parts of the bug. Comment #24 Already addressed in other parts of the bug. > Anyhow, I'll ask for the 4th time (comments #6, #10, #17 and #24): AFAICS the only things I didn't directly address directly are as follows: Comment #6 > At least the license file can get into this. > opal-devel.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided openh323-devel Fixed in cvs as of Jan 6th > Is openh323 compatible with opal? If yes, you should provide it. No, its not compatible. > * Please package the docs directory. I think it makes more sense to put it in > the -devel package. Fixed in cvs as of Jan 6th > * Shall we package samples and plugins (possibly in different subpackages)? > Note that some plugins have different licenses. Possibly but there's never been a request for them, alot of the samples don't work well so they end up causing more issues than their contribute. Comment #10 > Ok, How about the samples? See comment above. > Btw, currently the "MPEG4 Part 2" plugin is disabled for obvious reasons. Shall > we include it in a freeworld package at rpmfusion? Is there any benefit in > that? Possibly, but out of scope for this. Comment #17 Already addressed in other parts of the bug. Comment #24 Already addressed in other parts of the bug. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review