https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441828 --- Comment #36 from Vít Ondruch <vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to mgansser@xxxxxxxx from comment #35) > > (In reply to mgansser@xxxxxxxx from comment #33) > > > (In reply to Vít Ondruch from comment #30) > > > > > > > > > * Bundled engine.io library? > > > > > > - It seems engine.io library is bundled by nuvolaplayer. Is it required for > > > > > > something? If yes, shouldn't it be extracted or at least there should be > > > > > > the "bundled()" provider [4]. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Engine.io is not a bundled library in the meaning as a copy of an > > > > > independent library. It just hasn't been separated into and independent > > > > > library yet. Engineio is used in some experimental features which are not > > > > > built by default yet but that may change in the future. > > > > > > > > Frankly, I am not very satisfied with upstream response, since this [2] > > > > commit clearly links engine.io.js file from different upstream repository. > > > > Moreover, the .js file is in two copies currently in the source code ... > > > > > > > > > > answer from upstream: > > > I see. I thought you talked about libengineio-soup - the Vala port of > > > engineio. It didn't occur to me there is also engine.io.js. That could be > > > unbundled. However, I have no idea what is the typical filesystem location > > > for JavaScript libraries. Let's continue at #341. > > > Ticket: https://github.com/tiliado/nuvolaplayer/issues/341 > > > > These [1] are JavaScript guidelines which applies for Fedora if you decide > > to unbundle. If you decide to keep it bundle, then you should follow these > > guidelines [2]. > > > > > > > > [1]: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:JavaScript > > [2]: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Bundled_Libraries#Requirement_if_you_bundle > > i keep the library bundled for now The version should be probably there. If I am not mistaken, rpmlint complains about that. Have you considered to modify the branding [1]? Actually we already dealt with the branding/default.json earlier, but after the last upstream comment [2], I have the feeling that we might want to link our users to RH bugzilla at minimum. But not sure what is possible and reasonable ... [1]: https://github.com/tiliado/nuvolaplayer#branding [2]: https://github.com/tiliado/nuvolaplayer/issues/334#issuecomment-301033372 -- 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
