[Bug 710917] Review Request: vmpk - Virtual MIDI Piano Keyboard

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



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=710917

--- Comment #3 from Orcan Ogetbil <oget.fedora@xxxxxxxxx> 2011-06-21 11:40:19 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > Here is my review for this
> > - rpmlint output is clean
> > 
> > ? The package bundles the rtmidi library. Normally, we do not allow bundled
> > libraries in Fedora. However as far as I remember, the last time we checked
> > (1-2 years ago?), the rtmidi library was not packagable, so we allowed this as
> > an exception. Did you look into this?
> rtmidi library is still not dynamically linkable.
> 

No it is not. But
1- It can be made dynamically linkable. But this might conflict with upstream's
intentions. It should better be asked upstream.
2- Even if it should remain static, should we not package it separately? I am
not sure if bundling is the correct solution.

> > 
> > * The license tag as GPLv3+ is correct, except the bundled rtmidi library is
> > MIT. Depending on the unbundling situation we might need to add MIT to the
> > license tag.
> According to
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/FAQ#How_should_I_handle_multiple_licensing_situations.3F
> , since MIT is compatible with GPL, so only GPL is needed listed.
> 

I know about that guideline, which contradicts what FE-Legal says. I was
thinking exactly the same way you are, and a package reviewer asked me to list
all the licenses separately in the license tag of a package that all code was
compiled into a single binary. 

I asked FE-Legal, quoting the link you gave above, and they told me to list all
the licenses separately:
  
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-legal-list/2009-December/msg00029.html


> > 
> > ? Should we build this package with jack support? Jack is the most common sound
> > server used in audio production type applications.
> I prefer upstream default setting.

After you build the "vmpk" binary, you can pass some additional flag to cmake
to build another binary with jack support, you can even call the second binary
vmpk-jack. Please see the README and CMakeLists.txt files.

$ cmake . -DRTMIDI_DRIVER=JACK -DPROGRAM_NAME=vmpk-jack

Compiling with jack support is important, since we have a large collection of
jack-supporting programs, and this will allow "vmpk" to communicate with all of
them. jack is pretty much the standard sound server in Linux audio production
software. Do you have an argument why compiling with jack support will be bad
for Fedora users?

-- 
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


[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]