[Bug 1288610] Review Request: python-lazy-object-proxy - A fast and thorough lazy object proxy

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1288610

Petr Viktorin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 CC||pvikt...@redhat.com
 Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE
Last Closed||2018-12-06 09:52:53



--- Comment #7 from Petr Viktorin  ---
This is in Fedora for a while. Let me close the review request.

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1288610] Review Request: python-lazy-object-proxy - A fast and thorough lazy object proxy

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1288610



--- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/python-lazy-object-proxy

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1288610] Review Request: python-lazy-object-proxy - A fast and thorough lazy object proxy

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1288610



--- Comment #5 from Brian Lane  ---
Spec URL:
https://bcl.fedorapeople.org/python-lazy-object-proxy/python-lazy-object-proxy.spec
SRPM URL:
https://bcl.fedorapeople.org/python-lazy-object-proxy/python-lazy-object-proxy-1.2.1-1.fc24.src.rpm
Description: A fast and thorough lazy object proxy
Fedora Account System Username: bcl

Updated with %attr

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1288610] Review Request: python-lazy-object-proxy - A fast and thorough lazy object proxy

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1288610

David Shea  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ds...@redhat.com
  Flags||fedora-review?



-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1288610] Review Request: python-lazy-object-proxy - A fast and thorough lazy object proxy

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1288610



--- Comment #2 from Brian Lane  ---
(In reply to David Shea from comment #1)
> fedora-review is taking its sweet time, so a couple of comments while that's
> running:
> 
> - might as well just remove %check. The tests aren't hooked up via setup.py,
> and actually running them requires two more packages not in fedora.
> 

Ah, right, they're using tox instead.

> - Any reason you went with the github-generated tarball instead of the sdist
> from https://pypi.python.org/pypi/lazy-object-proxy ?  The MANIFEST has
> everything it's supposed to have, so the only differences in content are
> that pypi does not have .gitignore, does have PKG-INFO, and does have a
> .egg-info directory in src/ (which I think is supposed to be removed in
> %prep, though the packaging guidelines don't say that anymore for some
> reason). But anyway, the pypi tarball has a less weird name.

I tend to prefer the github files to pypi because they're updated more often
than pypi.

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1288610] Review Request: python-lazy-object-proxy - A fast and thorough lazy object proxy

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1288610



--- Comment #1 from David Shea  ---
fedora-review is taking its sweet time, so a couple of comments while that's
running:

- might as well just remove %check. The tests aren't hooked up via setup.py,
and actually running them requires two more packages not in fedora.

- Any reason you went with the github-generated tarball instead of the sdist
from https://pypi.python.org/pypi/lazy-object-proxy ?  The MANIFEST has
everything it's supposed to have, so the only differences in content are that
pypi does not have .gitignore, does have PKG-INFO, and does have a .egg-info
directory in src/ (which I think is supposed to be removed in %prep, though the
packaging guidelines don't say that anymore for some reason). But anyway, the
pypi tarball has a less weird name.

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1288610] Review Request: python-lazy-object-proxy - A fast and thorough lazy object proxy

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1288610

David Shea  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #3 from David Shea  ---
Ok here comes some text:

Issues:
===
- Package installs properly.
  Note: Installation errors (see attachment)
  See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines

This is because fedora-review tried to install the -debuginfo package twice for
some reason. It installs fine.

- Permissions on files are set properly.
  Note: See rpmlint output
  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#FilePermissions

comments and rpmlint output below.

= MUST items =

C/C++:
[ ]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[ ]: Package contains no static executables.
[ ]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
 Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
 attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "BSD (2 clause)", "Unknown or generated". 38 files have unknown
 license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/dshea/review-python-
 lazy-object-proxy/licensecheck.txt

(the LICENSE file, which is BSD, applies to all of those "unknown" licensed
files, so it's fine)

[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.

(I mean, I assume it does, it's using the right macros so if it doesn't then
not your problem)

[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
[ ]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
 license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
 license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
 that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
 provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
 %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
 process.
[-]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
 provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging 

[Bug 1288610] Review Request: python-lazy-object-proxy - A fast and thorough lazy object proxy

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1288610



--- Comment #4 from David Shea  ---
For the ones I left blank because I did a half-assed job of copying and pasting
the second time after bugzilla ate my first comment:

- no, there's no kernel modules
- or static executables
- unversioned .so files in non-standard locations is how Python binary modules
work
- and the package follows all of the directives within the 26 pages of the
Fedora Packaging Guidelines plus the 7 pages of the Python appendix plus all of
the other linked pages, probably.

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review