Bug 172527

Summary:	Review Request: python-astng
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Konstantin Ryabitsev <icon>
Component:	Package Review	Assignee:	José Matos <jamatos>
Status:	CLOSED NEXTRELEASE	QA Contact:	David Lawrence <dkl>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	rawhide	CC:	fedora-extras-list
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
URL:	http://www.logilab.org/projects/astng
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2005-11-12 18:36:37 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:
Bug Blocks:	163779

Description Konstantin Ryabitsev 2005-11-06 06:20:17 UTC

Spec Name or Url: http://linux.duke.edu/~icon/misc/fe/python-astng.spec
SRPM Name or Url: http://linux.duke.edu/~icon/misc/fe/python-astng-0.13.0-0.1.src.rpm
Description:
The aim of this module is to provide a common base representation of
python source code for projects such as pychecker, pyreverse,
pylint, and others. It extends the class defined in the compiler.ast 
python module with some additional methods and attributes.

PS: This is pulled in as a newly introduced requirement for pylint-0.8.

Comment 1 Konstantin Ryabitsev 2005-11-07 21:03:22 UTC

Updated to version 0.13.1 released today.
http://linux.duke.edu/~icon/misc/fe/python-astng.spec
http://linux.duke.edu/~icon/misc/fe/python-astng-0.13.1-0.1.src.rpm

Comment 2 José Matos 2005-11-12 18:05:01 UTC

Is this line really required? 
 
Requires:       python-abi = %(%{__python} -c "import sys ; print 
sys.version[:3]") 
 
I thought it was unnecessary for FC4+ 
 
Other than that it looks OK, I am building it using mock, and if all goes as I 
expect I will approve it soon. :-)

Comment 3 José Matos 2005-11-12 18:24:19 UTC

OK, ignore my comment, I just saw that line in fedora-rpmdevtools rpm.

Comment 4 José Matos 2005-11-12 18:36:37 UTC

Review: 
 
+ it build in mock on x86_64 
+ it carries the license, the license is correct (GPL) and valid for Extras 
+ the source file is the same as upstream 
 
+ the rpm follows the packaging guides 
+ the rpm follows the packaging name rules 
+ rpmlint does not have any output in any of the generated rpms 
+ the spec file is readable and it is written in American English 
+ the package carries code not contents 
 
Approved.

Comment 5 Konstantin Ryabitsev 2005-11-12 18:40:13 UTC

Thank you, kind sir -- it will be imported shortly. :)