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
Bug 449879 - Review Request: Zile - Zile Is Lossy Emacs
Summary: Review Request: Zile - Zile Is Lossy Emacs
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Debarshi Ray
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
Depends On:
Blocks: 447125
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2008-06-04 03:28 UTC by Rakesh Pandit
Modified: 2014-09-24 03:48 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version: zile-2.4.11-3.el7
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2008-08-23 15:33:08 UTC
Type: ---
debarshir: fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Rakesh Pandit 2008-06-04 03:28:33 UTC
Spec URL:

Zile is a small Emacs clone. Zile is a customizable, self-documenting
real-time open-source display editor. Zile was written to be as
similar as possible to Emacs; every Emacs user should feel at home.

Comment 1 Rakesh Pandit 2008-06-04 03:31:19 UTC
This is my third package and I am still seeking a sponsor.

Comment 2 Jason Tibbitts 2008-06-06 04:06:26 UTC
A zile package already seems to be in the distribution.

Comment 3 Rakesh Pandit 2008-06-06 04:55:50 UTC
>A zile package already seems to be in the distribution.
distribution version is 2.2.19 and this on is 2.2.59 

It was packaged long time back and after pinging to maintainer there was no
See: and

So, going by Non-responsive Maintainer Policy I have packaged zile and posted bug

Comment 5 Debarshi Ray 2008-08-13 19:33:47 UTC
MUST Items: 

OK - rpmlint is clean
OK - follows Naming Guidelines
OK - spec file is named as %{name}.spec

xx - package does not meet Packaging Guidelines
    + According to you
      you need to have:
      'Requires(post): info'
      'Requires(preun): info'
    + To preserve timestamps you could consider using:
      make install INSTALL="%{__install} -p" DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT
    + According to the
      INSTALL file should not be distributed.

xx - Fedora approved license and meets Licensing Guidelines
    + Wrong value of License field.

xx - License field meets actual license
    + It should be GPLv3+ instead of GPLv3, since the license notice in the
      sources say:
      "GNU Zile is free software; ...
      under the terms of the GNU General Public License ...
      ... ; either version 3, or (at your option)
      any later version."

OK - upstream license file included in %doc
OK - spec file uses American English
OK - spec file is legible
OK - sources match upstream sources
OK - package builds successfully
OK - ExcludeArch not needed
OK - build dependencies correctly listed
OK - no locales
OK - no shared libraries
OK - package is not relocatable
OK - file and directory ownership
OK - no duplicates in %file
OK - file permissions set properly
OK - %clean present

xx - macros used consistently
    + Apart from one place  in the %files stanza you have used %{name} instead
      of zile. Please remove the inconsistency.

OK - contains code and permissable content
OK - -doc is not needed
OK - contents of %doc does not affect the runtime
OK - no header files
OK - no static libraries
OK - no pkgconfig files
OK - no library files
OK - -devel is not needed
OK - no libtool archives
OK - %{name}.desktop file not needed
OK - does not own files or directories owned by other packages
OK - buildroot correctly prepped
OK - all file names valid UTF-8


OK - upstream provides license text
xx - no translations for description and summary
OK - package builds in mock successfully
OK - package builds on all supported architectures
OK - package functions as expected
OK - scriptlets are sane
OK - subpackages are not needed
OK - no pkgconfig files
OK - no file dependencies

Comment 6 Jason Tibbitts 2008-08-13 19:47:55 UTC
You know, I just committed to the existing zile package in the distribution (to fix up the license tag.)  Why don't you just add yourself as a comaintainer and then work on the package we have?

Comment 7 Rakesh Pandit 2008-08-13 19:58:57 UTC
Fixed -- all above mentioned issues.


Comment 8 Debarshi Ray 2008-08-13 20:33:06 UTC
| This package is APPROVED by me. |

Comment 9 Rakesh Pandit 2008-08-23 15:33:08 UTC
I have added myself as a co-maintainer.

Comment 10 Eric Smith 2013-01-13 18:28:35 UTC
Package Change Request
Package Name: zile
New Branches: el6
Owners: rakesh brouhaha

I contacted Rakesh by email about adding Zile to EPEL6, and offering to maintain it in EPEL if he didn't want to.  He replied that I was welcome to request and maintain the el6 branch, and also maintain the Fedora branches.

I've done a local build on Centos 6.3, which seems to work fine.

Comment 11 Gwyn Ciesla 2013-01-14 11:45:32 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 12 Fedora Update System 2013-01-15 08:43:37 UTC
zile-2.3.21-5.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6.

Comment 13 Fedora Update System 2013-02-02 19:42:09 UTC
zile-2.3.21-5.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository.

Comment 14 Fedora Update System 2014-08-30 05:22:31 UTC
ckermit-9.0.302-7.el7 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 7.

Comment 15 Fedora Update System 2014-08-30 05:24:17 UTC
zile-2.4.11-3.el7 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 7.

Comment 16 Fedora Update System 2014-09-24 03:48:27 UTC
zile-2.4.11-3.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository.

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