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=594414 Stanislav Ochotnicky <sochotni@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #10 from Stanislav Ochotnicky <sochotni@xxxxxxxxxx> 2010-07-13 07:50:55 EDT --- (In reply to comment #9) > (In reply to comment #8) > > OK-SORT OF: The package must be named according to the Package Naming > > Guidelines. > > > > The upstream uses name "EZMorph" everywhere. I would suggest you rename > > this package so that it matches upstream. > > I disagree with this. Upstream uses "ezmorph" (lowercased) both in POM and in > distfiles. Those are usually considered key to naming the package. Sure I have no problem with this, just wanted to be sure this was not accidental. > > Since we are creating the tar file...it would actually be nice to make > > it as small as possible. Please use LZMA compressionL > > tar caf ezmorph-1.0.6.tar.xz --exclude CVS ezmorph-1.0.6 > > [lkundrak@localhost SOURCES]$ time tar caf ezmorph-1.0.6.tar.xz --exclude CVS > ezmorph-1.0.6 > > real 0m0.159s > user 0m0.109s > sys 0m0.033s > > [lkundrak@localhost SOURCES]$ time tar czf ezmorph-1.0.6.tar.gz --exclude CVS > ezmorph-1.0.6 > > real 0m0.034s > user 0m0.010s > sys 0m0.009s > > [lkundrak@localhost SOURCES]$ time tar xzf ezmorph-1.0.6.tar.gz > > real 0m0.031s > user 0m0.007s > sys 0m0.012s > > [lkundrak@localhost SOURCES]$ time tar xaf ezmorph-1.0.6.tar.xz > > real 0m0.036s > user 0m0.005s > sys 0m0.015s > > [lkundrak@localhost SOURCES]$ du -sh ezmorph-1.0.6.tar.gz ezmorph-1.0.6.tar.xz > 24K ezmorph-1.0.6.tar.gz > 20K ezmorph-1.0.6.tar.xz > > This is actually quite funny. What are the benefits? A single disk block? > > Seriously, nothing against XZ (I already use it for bigger projects such as > VirtualBox-OSE in RPM Fusion, or Inkscape where the time savings are > substantial), but I'm not using it for small projects as this unless it's > portable enough and considered an estabilished standard. Please note that even > in el5 it's still not part of default build root. Like I said...suggestion to use XZ compression was based on the idea that you would be changing name... No problem here. I guess I've been working od Fedora-rawhide stuff too much :-) > > * license (optional) > > Will mail upstream. > > > Sorry I didn't notice those things earlier (especially the name...compression > > is not THAT important, but while you are changing the spec...) > > So, no new package this time either (until we solve the disputes above, if > there still are any, or there's no more issues) None of those things prevent me from approving this package. They were more of suggestions than requirements. The lower/upper case is usually up to maintainer (you), I just wanted to be sure you realized this. Package is APPROVED. -- 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. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review