[Bug 1427341] Review Request: python-gamera - Gamera is a framework for building document analysis applications.

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

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1427341



--- Comment #24 from Charalampos Stratakis <cstratak@xxxxxxxxxx> ---
So after some discussions with Miro and running the fedora-review tool we
figured out some more things.

The devel subpackage should be named python2-gamera-devel and this macro should
be used to provide the python namespace for it (similar to the main package):

%{?python_provide:%python_provide python2-%{srcname}-devel}

The package bundles some software as well as it can be seen from these
directories:

https://github.com/hsnr-gamera/gamera/tree/master/src
https://github.com/hsnr-gamera/gamera/tree/master/include

It bundles vigra, zlib, eo, libpng and libtiff (hope I didn't miss anything).
The zlib folders should be removed during prep (from the Include and src
subdirs) and instead a BuildRequires for the zlib-devel package should be used.

Same for libpng-1.2.5 and libtiff folders.

As for the rest of the bundled software, they should be provided as virtual
provides according to:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Bundled_Libraries?rd=Packaging:Bundled_Libraries

So you will need to add at the main package:
Provides: bundled(vigra) = 1.6.0
Provides: bundled(eo) = 1.3.1

Also there is an executable bit which should be removed during prep from:

/include/plugins/deformations.hpp

The package has documentation as well which must be built. I checked the
sources and docs are being generated by executing the file gendoc.py. Then it
should be be placed at a separate subpackage, named python2-gamera-doc, with a
similar naming pattern as the devel subpackage.

I still haven't figured out the best way to do that, as gamera uses itself to
build the documentation, so some environment variable will have to be exported
during build. I will conduct some more testing and let you know.

Now about the license.

>From the fedora-review output:
Licenses found: "LGPL (v2)", "*No copyright* LGPL (v2 or later)", "LGPL (v2 or
later)", "GPL (v2 or later)", "CC by-sa GPL", "Unknown or generated", "MIT/X11
(BSD like)", "NTP", "MIT/X11 (BSD like) NTP", "zlib/libpng", "LGPL", "GPL (v2
or later) (with incorrect FSF address)"

The final license of the package (indicated at the License field) should be
"GPLv2+ and MIT and CC BY-SA" (thanks Miro), however I will need to dig a bit
deeper to verify that, so don't change the field yet.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




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