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 --- Comment #33 from Alex Lancaster <alexl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2010-07-14 20:18:22 EDT --- (In reply to comment #32) > Hi, > > I apologise for not replying to this ticket sooner. Hi Graeme, Glad to hear you're still interested, sometimes closing a bug will elicit a response... :) > 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. Can you briefly outline the issues with Moovida 1.0? Did they change the license? Can we cherry-pick stuff from their SVN/Git repo or whatever they use even if they don't release proper tarballs? > 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. If that's the case, perhaps we could consider moving moovida to RPM Fusion (assuming licensing would be OK for RPM Fusion)? It seems like a lot of work to get 1.x into Fedora if it isn't going to be maintained upstream. > 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 I guess there's no harm in getting into Fedora, however we may have to think about the long-term if we end up moving it to RPM Fusion later. Aside: It was annoying that they changed the name from elisa for no good reason, creating churn (like the need for this re-review in the first place), now they are retooling again so soon? What's fluendo's strategy here? (feel free to e-mail me offline since this is a bit off-topic for the review request) -- 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