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 177881 (lucidlife) - Review Request: lucidlife
Summary: Review Request: lucidlife
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED NEXTRELEASE
Alias: lucidlife
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: John Mahowald
QA Contact: David Lawrence
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: FE-ACCEPT
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2006-01-16 02:28 UTC by Peter Gordon
Modified: 2007-11-30 22:11 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2006-02-28 02:32:42 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Peter Gordon 2006-01-16 02:28:04 UTC
Spec Name or Url: http://peter.ramshacklestudios.com/downloads/fedora/extras/lucidlife.spec
SRPM Name or Url: http://peter.ramshacklestudios.com/downloads/fedora/extras/lucidlife-0.9-1.src.rpm

Description: LucidLife is a Conway's Life simulator. The rules are rather simple. The game is started with a large grid of cell locations, and an arbitrary set of living cells. On each turn, each cell thrives or dies based on the number of cells which sourround it. A dead (empty) cell with three live cells around it becomes a living cell (a birth); a living cell with two or three neighbors survives; otherwise the cell dies (due to overcrowding) or remains dead (due to loneliness). It is based on the the GtkLife project, but with a
more modern user interface and other enhancements.

Comment 1 Peter Gordon 2006-01-16 02:29:15 UTC
I forgot to add that this is my first submission to Fedora Extras, so I will
need a sponsor. Thanks.

Comment 2 Peter Gordon 2006-01-16 05:10:09 UTC
I just thought of something. My spec file currently has a direct dependency on
GTK+ 2.6 or higher. Since FC3 is being end-of-life'd tomorrow with the release
of FC5 Test 2, and FC4 includes GTK+ 2.6, do I really that strict version
dependency there? I know it's probably a very minor issue, but I think it could
help keep the spec file clean. Thanks for your input.

Comment 3 Paul Howarth 2006-01-16 08:03:00 UTC
(In reply to comment #2)
> I just thought of something. My spec file currently has a direct dependency on
> GTK+ 2.6 or higher. Since FC3 is being end-of-life'd tomorrow with the release
> of FC5 Test 2, and FC4 includes GTK+ 2.6, do I really that strict version
> dependency there? I know it's probably a very minor issue, but I think it could
> help keep the spec file clean. Thanks for your input.

I would be inclined to leave the explicit requirement, for the benefit of people
that want to rebuild your package for other distros themselves (FC3 will go to
legacy and many people will still use it, and someone rebuilds most Extras
packages for CentOS too - see http://centos.karan.org/).

Comment 4 Peter Gordon 2006-01-16 14:17:18 UTC
(In reply to comment #3)
> I would be inclined to leave the explicit requirement, for the benefit of people
> that want to rebuild your package for other distros themselves (FC3 will go to
> legacy and many people will still use it, and someone rebuilds most Extras
> packages for CentOS too - see http://centos.karan.org/).
I agree. Thanks for the advice, Paul. :-)


Comment 5 Brian Pepple 2006-02-19 15:49:13 UTC
I don't have permission to sponser you, but here's an initial review:

MD5Sum:
25bcde0ddbe4f7db4a7ea92fcc36b7bc  lucidlife-0.9.tar.gz

Good:
* Source URL is canonical
* Upstream source tarball verified
* Package name conforms to the Fedora Naming Guidelines
* Buildroot has all required elements
* All paths begin with macros
* All necessary BuildRequires listed.
* Package builds fine in Mock for FC5.
* Rpmlint does not find problems
* Installs & runs fine.

Bad:
* Desktop file is not handled correctly.  Refer to
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-254ddf07aae20a23ced8cecc219d8f73926e9755

Minor:
* Drop the Requires for gtk2 & gnome-vfs2, the devel sonames will pull these in.
* Should probably use %{_datadir}/%{name}/ in the files section in case of
problems with file ownership.

Comment 6 Peter Gordon 2006-02-19 20:56:46 UTC
Thanks, Brian. I've updated the .spec file and the source RPM per your suggestions.

Spec:  http://peter.ramshacklestudios.com/downloads/fedora/extras/lucidlife.spec
SRPM: 
http://peter.ramshacklestudios.com/downloads/fedora/extras/lucidlife-0.9-2.src.rpm

Comment 7 John Mahowald 2006-02-26 17:33:07 UTC
I concur with Brian in comment 5.

The only other thing I could see was that there were both a lucidlife and a
lucidlife-0.9 dir in the docs dir. If that's too confusing a symlink might fix
it up. Not a blocker though.

APPROVED.

I'll sponsor when you apply for cvsextras.

Comment 8 Peter Gordon 2006-02-26 17:58:52 UTC
Thanks, John. :)

I've just submitted my CLA and have applied for membership to cvsextras.

Comment 9 Peter Gordon 2006-02-28 02:32:42 UTC
Builds completed. Closing as NEXTRELEASE. Thanks!


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