Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: jokosher https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199029 ------- Additional Comments From snecklifter@xxxxxxxxx 2006-09-28 16:25 EST ------- (In reply to comment #33) > The SOURCE1 isn't a binary. It's a script. I can see why you're doing that but > it is kinda ugly. What's upstream's plans for future releases? Will they > include that kind of script? Or make it so Jokosher.py actually can be > installed to %{bindir}? Or....? Plans are to make Jokosher.py executable, if not for 0.2 then for 0.3. 0.2 is out end of November. > __init__.py might be better as: > touch %{buildroot}%{python-sitelib}/%{name}/__init__.py fixed. > but you have a comment in your changelog about security. Can you explain if > touch would be a problem? No problem at all, thank you for suggestion. > Putting the png images into %{python-sitelib} isn't a great idea. Is it hard to > put them into %{_datadir}/%{name} or something similar? The instrument files also sit in this directoy however this is changing in 0.2. Can this be accepted for 0.1 or am I better off waiting for 0.2? I am beginning to think the latter as there are a number of things that this process has highlighted that are resolved in 0.2 > If you use your jokosher script you probably don't want execute permissions on > Jokosher.py. fixed > I'm not sure about the wisdom of making WaveForm.py exectuable. It loks to me > as though directly executing WaveForm.py makes a test case run... so this isn't > something someone who installs jokosher is going to want to do. (Correct me if > I'm wrong on that.) Waveform.py is a test case although one class does import it, this has since been fixed. I have fixed this however. As it stands I do not have the know-how to patch the code to meet the requirements wrt the images and instrument files. Unless these can be overlooked along with the script executable I will delay this package until an admittedly more mature app arrives with 0.2. Input appreciated. I have not made a new release until above is clarified. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review