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=554243 Graeme Gillies <ggillies@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|NOTABUG | --- Comment #32 from Graeme Gillies <ggillies@xxxxxxxxxx> 2010-07-14 19:52:11 EDT --- Hi, I apologise for not replying to this ticket sooner. I was keeping an eye on it, but I was holding off doing any more work on packaging moovida as moovida 2.0 had been anounced and the linux port released to limited testing, and I wanted to see the feasibility of packaging that for fedora instead. Unfortunately due to licensing and fluendo's resistance to releasing pure tarballs, it looks like moovida 2.0 probably won't be making it into fedora anytime soon. On top of this, moovida 1.0 is no longer formerly supported by fluendo, so getting futher updates or bugs fixed in moovida may be tricky. I was also away for the last 3 weeks on holiday which is why I didn't reply straight away. Anyway I have had a look over the spec files and the comments above and have fixed the outstanding problems raised. I have created new rpms for both moovida, and the good and bad plugins packages (see the other bugs for the other packages). moovida.spec http://ggillies.fedorapeople.org/moovida.spec moovida-1.0.9-3.fc13.src.rpm http://ggillies.fedorapeople.org/moovida-1.0.9-3.fc13.src.rpm I'm still keen to get 1.0 into fedora, and I am re-opening this review in the hopes of taking up Hans de Goede's offer of review and sponsorship -- 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