[Bug 1381087] Review Request: python-pandas-datareader - Data readers from the pandas codebase

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1381087

Sergio Pascual  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE
Last Closed||2016-10-19 06:00:32



-- 
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 1381087] Review Request: python-pandas-datareader - Data readers from the pandas codebase

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1381087



--- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/python-pandas-datareader

-- 
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 1381087] Review Request: python-pandas-datareader - Data readers from the pandas codebase

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1381087



--- Comment #4 from Sergio Pascual  ---
Thank you for the review! 

I will remove the tests for the moment

-- 
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 1381087] Review Request: python-pandas-datareader - Data readers from the pandas codebase

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1381087

Julien Enselme  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #3 from Julien Enselme  ---
> There several bugs upstream about failing tests. I have enabled tests but the 
> build will not fail on tests failing. Not all tests seem to be installed, so 
> I'm running the tests directly in the source code

I didn't know that. Tests are a should items, and if you know they are
unreliable, you can completely remove the %check section. An alternative could
be to skip only the tests that causes problem (but it may not be possible or
require lots of work).

You now have rpmlint warnings about macro in comments. You can either remove
the line or use double % to avoid them. An alternative way to going to the
buildroot is to set PYTHONPATH to the current working directory.

Anyway, it looks good. Approved.

-- 
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 1381087] Review Request: python-pandas-datareader - Data readers from the pandas codebase

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1381087



--- Comment #2 from Sergio Pascual  ---

New files with you changes. There several bugs upstream about failing tests. I
have enabled tests but the build will not fail on tests failing. Not all tests
seem to be installed, so I'm running the tests directly in the source code

Spec URL: https://guaix.fis.ucm.es/~spr/fedora/python-pandas-datareader.spec
SRPM URL:
https://guaix.fis.ucm.es/~spr/fedora/python-pandas-datareader-0.2.1-2.fc24.src.rpm

-- 
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 1381087] Review Request: python-pandas-datareader - Data readers from the pandas codebase

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1381087

Julien Enselme  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||juj...@jujens.eu
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|juj...@jujens.eu
  Flags||fedora-review?



--- Comment #1 from Julien Enselme  ---
- Please remove the 
%{?python_provide:%python_provide python-%{srcname}} line outside the python2
and python3 packages.
- The use of the %{sum} macro is not needed. Use %{summary} instead.
- In the %files section, I think it is easier to know the files that are
packaged by being a little more specific, eg %{python3_sitelib}/* ->
%{python3_sitelib}/pandas_datareader/ and
%{python3_sitelib}/pandas_datareader-%{version}-py%{python3_version}.egg-info/
- Please launch tests in the %check section
- Requires are not valid. Package requires pandas, requests and requests-file.
BR for requests and requests-file are not needed until you launch the tests.

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: "BSD (3 clause)", "*No copyright* BSD", "Unknown or generated".
 30 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
 /tmp/1381087-python-pandas-datareader/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.
[!]: 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]: 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.
[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 

[Bug 1381087] Review Request: python-pandas-datareader - Data readers from the pandas codebase

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1381087

Sergio Pascual  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1379686




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1379686
[Bug 1379686] pandas.io.data is deprecated
-- 
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