Bug 1288453

Issues:
=======
- Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
  (~1MB) or number of files.
  Note: Documentation size is 1576960 bytes in 4 files.
  See:
  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#PackageDocumentation

I think it would make sense to create a -doc subpackage, Suggested by the python2- and python3- subpackages. Alternatively, you could use a common
doc directory for both packages (using '%global _docdir_fmt %{name}').

Requires
--------
python3-CommonMark (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /usr/bin/python2  <-------------------------------- !
    python(abi)

python2-CommonMark (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    python(abi)

SPEC: http://dl.jujens.eu/SPECS/python-CommonMark.spec
SRPM: http://dl.jujens.eu/SRPMS/python-CommonMark-0.5.4-2.fc23.src.rpm


* Fri Dec 4 2015 Julien Enselme <jujens> - 0.5.4-2
- Correct shebang of cmark.py (/usr/bin/python2 -> /usr/bin/python3)
- Add doc packages.

The point of the -doc subpackage is to avoid duplication to save disk space. It also saves user confusion, because the don't have to look at python2-*-doc first, and then at python3-*-doc first, and realize that the documentation is identical. Files in python2-CommonMark-doc and python2-CommonMark-doc *are* identical, there should be just one -doc package.

You can avoid defining %sum. Just put the summary in the first Summary, and then use %summary in subsequent subpackages. The summary for -doc should be different though.

Please use %{__python3} to refer to /usr/bin/python3 everywhere in the spec file.

You probably don't need to use sed to fix the shebang line. Just move %py2_install below %py3_install.

PYTHONPATH=$(pwd):$PYTHONPATH → PYTHONPATH=$(pwd)
PYTHONPATH is normally unset, so you don't need to preserve the previous one.

> You can avoid defining %sum. Just put the summary in the first Summary, and then use %summary in subsequent subpackages.

I didn't know that. Is there something similar for description?


> PYTHONPATH is normally unset, so you don't need to preserve the previous one.

It's more an habit to preserve it, but I agree it is not useful.

> You probably don't need to use sed to fix the shebang line. Just move 
%py2_install below %py3_install.

Should the binary use python3 by default? It works, I tested it. That's why I put %py3_install last and corrected the shebang.


* Sat Dec 5 2015 Julien Enselme <jujens> - 0.5.4-3
- Use only one doc package.
- Use %%summary to avoid summary repetition.
- Use %%__python3 macro to fix shebang.


SPEC: http://dl.jujens.eu/SPECS/python-CommonMark.spec
SRPM: http://dl.jujens.eu/SRPMS/python-CommonMark-0.5.4-3.fc23.src.rpm

(In reply to Julien Enselme from comment #4)
> > You can avoid defining %sum. Just put the summary in the first Summary, and then use %summary in subsequent subpackages.
> 
> I didn't know that. Is there something similar for description?
Nope.

> > PYTHONPATH is normally unset, so you don't need to preserve the previous one.
> 
> It's more an habit to preserve it, but I agree it is not useful.
> 
> > You probably don't need to use sed to fix the shebang line. Just move 
> %py2_install below %py3_install.
> 
> Should the binary use python3 by default? It works, I tested it. That's why
> I put %py3_install last and corrected the shebang.
Oh, OK. Yes, python3 is preferred [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Executables_in_.2Fusr.2Fbin].


> * Sat Dec 5 2015 Julien Enselme <jujens> - 0.5.4-3
> - Use only one doc package.
> - Use %%summary to avoid summary repetition.
> - Use %%__python3 macro to fix shebang.
> 
> 
> SPEC: http://dl.jujens.eu/SPECS/python-CommonMark.spec
> SRPM: http://dl.jujens.eu/SRPMS/python-CommonMark-0.5.4-3.fc23.src.rpm

- license is OK
- license file is present, %license is used
- latest version
- builds and installs OK
- new python template is used
- python3 is preferred
- requires and provides are OK
- no scriptlets present or needed
- rpmlint says: no-documentation, no-manual-page-for-binary, spelling-error, python-bytecode-without-source. All false positives or ignorable.

You might want to add Suggests: python-CommonMark-doc to the python2- and python3- subpackages.

Package is APPROVED.

> Suggests: python-CommonMark-doc to the python2- and python3- subpackages.

Indeed, thanks for the suggestion.

Thanks for the review.

Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/python-CommonMark

python-CommonMark-0.5.4-3.fc22 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 22. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-288b77d774

python-CommonMark-0.5.4-3.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-6cc818a6aa

python-CommonMark-0.5.4-3.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
If you want to test the update, you can install it with
$ su -c 'dnf --enablerepo=updates-testing update python-CommonMark'
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-288b77d774

python-CommonMark-0.5.4-3.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
If you want to test the update, you can install it with
$ su -c 'dnf --enablerepo=updates-testing update python-CommonMark'
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-6cc818a6aa

python-CommonMark-0.5.4-3.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

python-CommonMark-0.5.4-3.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.