Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at bugzilla.redhat.com.
Bug 1315021 (openvibe) - Review Request: openvibe - A software platform for brain-computer interfaces
Summary: Review Request: openvibe - A software platform for brain-computer interfaces
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE
Alias: openvibe
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On: vrpn
Blocks: fedora-neuro, NeuroFedora
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2016-03-05 18:55 UTC by Dmitry Mikhirev
Modified: 2016-04-03 20:50 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-04-03 20:50:09 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
zbyszek: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Dmitry Mikhirev 2016-03-05 18:55:41 UTC
Spec URL: http://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/cgit/bizdelnick/neuro/openvibe.git/plain/openvibe.spec?id=4472df9e559e5e5454773b69012b2a5a9dd7f1bc
SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/bizdelnick/neuro/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00165929-openvibe/openvibe-1.1.0-1.fc25.src.rpm
Description: OpenViBE is a software for real-time neurosciences (that is, for real-time processing of brain signals). It can be used to acquire, filter, process, classify and visualize brain signals in real time.
Fedora Account System Username: bizdelnick

Comment 1 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek 2016-03-05 19:01:59 UTC
Can you make vrpn mandatory? I'll review vrpn, and conditionals make everything more complicated.

Comment 2 Dmitry Mikhirev 2016-03-05 19:09:41 UTC
Sure, I'll make it mandatory after vrpn will be approved. Or should I do this right now?

Comment 3 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek 2016-03-05 19:14:22 UTC
Right now. Unless you think there's some reason to think that vrpn might not be approved. Looks like a well done package, so I wouldn't think so.

Comment 5 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek 2016-03-07 02:26:18 UTC
Change python-devel to python2-devel, or maybe python3-devel? Would it work with python3?

There should be an appdata file [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:AppData].

Note: if you package for F23- (F24+ is fine as is), you'll need to add scriptlets for the desktop files [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Scriptlets?rd=Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#desktop-database].

Comment 6 Dmitry Mikhirev 2016-03-07 21:09:12 UTC
> Change python-devel to python2-devel, or maybe python3-devel? Would it work with python3?

It wants python 2.7 only. Changed to python2-devel.

> Note: if you package for F23- (F24+ is fine as is), you'll need to add scriptlets for the desktop files

Added.

> There should be an appdata file

Well, "should" is not "must", right? ☺

Spec URL: http://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/cgit/bizdelnick/neuro/openvibe.git/plain/openvibe.spec?id=c3df616e09207a638e8665db14d637b2a0e13e86
SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/bizdelnick/neuro/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00166419-openvibe/openvibe-1.1.0-1.fc25.src.rpm

Comment 7 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek 2016-03-07 21:11:43 UTC
It's "SHOULD" not "should" ;) It means "must unless there's a good reason not to".

Comment 9 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek 2016-03-09 04:01:48 UTC
Please always link to the raw spec file for fedora-review's sake.

+ latest version
+ license is acceptable (AGPLv3)
+ license file is present, %license is used
+ scriptlets look OK
- provides/requires are not OK (see below)
+ builds and installs OK

No %check (apart from the desktop files and appdata) :(
Use appstream-util validate-relax --nonet, otherwise it fails in mock.

Installation fails with:
nothing provides libquat.so.07()(64bit) needed by openvibe-1.1.0-1.fc25.x86_64.

Comment 10 Dmitry Mikhirev 2016-03-09 20:20:33 UTC
> Please always link to the raw spec file for fedora-review's sake.
I'm sorry.

> No %check (apart from the desktop files and appdata) :(
I did not add running tests because they require X server connection. I supposed that there should be a workaround, but I found the page https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/GraphicalTests only after submitting this review request. So I can try to enable tests now.

> Use appstream-util validate-relax --nonet, otherwise it fails in mock.
OK.

> Installation fails with:
> nothing provides libquat.so.07()(64bit) needed by openvibe-1.1.0-1.fc25.x86_64.
Right, it is provided by vrpn package.

Comment 11 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek 2016-03-09 21:01:18 UTC
(In reply to Dmitry Mikhirev from comment #10)
> > Please always link to the raw spec file for fedora-review's sake.
> I'm sorry.
Not a big problem, just an additional step.

> > No %check (apart from the desktop files and appdata) :(
> I did not add running tests because they require X server connection. I
> supposed that there should be a workaround, but I found the page
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/GraphicalTests only after
> submitting this review request. So I can try to enable tests now.
I think it's useful. At least checking if the binaries actually run
can be useful:
$ /usr/bin/openvibe-external-application-launcher
/usr/bin/openvibe-external-application-launcher: line 24: /usr/bin/: Is a directory

It seems that something is wrong here.

> > Installation fails with:
> > nothing provides libquat.so.07()(64bit) needed by openvibe-1.1.0-1.fc25.x86_64.
> Right, it is provided by vrpn package.
Oh, OK. I didn't notice that. With vrpn installed everything installs fine.

Package is APPROVED.

Comment 12 Gwyn Ciesla 2016-03-14 13:41:50 UTC
Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/openvibe

Comment 13 Mike McCune 2016-03-28 23:47:57 UTC
This bug was accidentally moved from POST to MODIFIED via an error in automation, please see mmccune with any questions


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.