[Bug 1332052] Review Request: python-filelock - A platform independent file lock

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332052



--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-filelock-2.0.6-2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.

-- 
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

[Bug 1332052] Review Request: python-filelock - A platform independent file lock

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332052



--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-filelock-2.0.6-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.

-- 
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

[Bug 1332052] Review Request: python-filelock - A platform independent file lock

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332052

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed|2016-10-02 23:50:30 |2016-10-08 22:53:56



--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-filelock-2.0.6-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 stable
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.

-- 
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

[Bug 1332052] Review Request: python-filelock - A platform independent file lock

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332052

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|CLOSED  |ON_QA
 Resolution|ERRATA  |---
   Keywords||Reopened



--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-filelock-2.0.6-2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-0fdf697d47

-- 
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

[Bug 1332052] Review Request: python-filelock - A platform independent file lock

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332052



--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-filelock-2.0.6-1.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.

-- 
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

[Bug 1332052] Review Request: python-filelock - A platform independent file lock

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332052

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2016-10-02 23:50:30



--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-filelock-2.0.6-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 stable
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.

-- 
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

[Bug 1332052] Review Request: python-filelock - A platform independent file lock

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332052



--- Comment #10 from Scott K Logan  ---
Thanks, Tuomo. I'll have that fixed ASAP.

--scott

-- 
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

[Bug 1332052] Review Request: python-filelock - A platform independent file lock

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332052



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-filelock-2.0.6-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-d99061b906

-- 
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

[Bug 1332052] Review Request: python-filelock - A platform independent file lock

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332052

Tuomo Soini  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||t...@foobar.fi



--- Comment #8 from Tuomo Soini  ---
Epel6 update is broken:

package: python-filelock-doc-2.0.6-1.el6.noarch
  unresolved deps: 
 google-roboto-slab-fonts

-- 
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

[Bug 1332052] Review Request: python-filelock - A platform independent file lock

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332052



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-filelock-2.0.6-1.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-cb33a5937b

-- 
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

[Bug 1332052] Review Request: python-filelock - A platform independent file lock

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332052



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-filelock-2.0.6-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-343b685e87

-- 
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

[Bug 1332052] Review Request: python-filelock - A platform independent file lock

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332052



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-filelock-2.0.6-1.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-389bd2e5a0

-- 
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

[Bug 1332052] Review Request: python-filelock - A platform independent file lock

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332052

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
python-filelock-2.0.6-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-330347da44

-- 
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

[Bug 1332052] Review Request: python-filelock - A platform independent file lock

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332052



--- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/python-filelock

-- 
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

[Bug 1332052] Review Request: python-filelock - A platform independent file lock

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332052



--- Comment #2 from Scott K Logan  ---
The man page which is installed was provided by upstream as a "section 1" man
page, so I installed it there. You're right - it really belongs in sections 3
or 7. I'll consider passing that along to upstream for consideration.

I was able to un-bundle most of the fonts.The RobotoSlab fonts are actually
provided by google-roboto-slab-fonts, but unfortunately, I can't find any
packages which specifically provide Inconsolata-Bold.ttf or
Inconsolata-Regular.ttf (levien-inconsolata-fonts did not provide these).

It would be great if there was a better way to handle bundled fonts in
generated documentation. The package which actually provided the fonts,
python-sphinx_rtd_theme, is actually bundling them as well. A simple "dnf
provides" operation shows what a large problem this is...

Thanks for the 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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1332052] Review Request: python-filelock - A platform independent file lock

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332052

Julien Enselme  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #1 from Julien Enselme  ---
- A man page is included but there is no executable in this package. Is this
intended?
- Can you unbundled fonts in doc package (see below)?

Otherwise, there's no blocking items. Approved.

Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed


= MUST items =

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: "Unknown or generated". 5 files have unknown license. Detailed
 output of licensecheck in /tmp/1332052-python-
 filelock/licensecheck.txt
[X]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[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]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[X]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 2 files.
[X]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[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]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[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]: 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.
[X]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
 provide egg info.
[X]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[!]: Avoid bundling fonts in non-fonts packages.
 Note: Package contains font files
Some fonts are bundled in the doc package. Can you make the doc package depends
on these packages:
- lato-fonts.noarch
- levien-inconsolata-fonts.noarch
- fontawesome-fonts.noarch

and use symlinks to the proper font files in the doc package?

RobotoSlab fonts doesn't look to be packaged. If you choose to create it,
please assign me to the review.


[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
 file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[X]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[X]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if 

[Bug 1332052] Review Request: python-filelock - A platform independent file lock

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332052

Julien Enselme  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||juj...@jujens.eu
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|juj...@jujens.eu
  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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1332052] Review Request: python-filelock - A platform independent file lock

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332052

Scott K Logan  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Whiteboard||Trivial



-- 
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
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org