Bug 1781608

I'm going to pick this one.

* The spec file is the same as when the package was orphaned/retired in dist-git (modulo a rebuild): https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-pathtools/c/6e454195d704a811d3f005c47a94234b649beff5?branch=master
* Sources did not change upstream and thus should still be valid, I however, cannot check for the moment the sources included in the srpm. Stephen could you provide a direct link to the srpm?

I have checked the 0.1.2 tarball present on the lookaside cache, licensing looks fine.

I have one issue about the source of the 0.1.2 tarball as I do not see it upstream https://github.com/gorakhargosh/pathtools/releases or even in the sources themselves: https://github.com/gorakhargosh/pathtools/blob/master/pathtools/version.py
but it is in pypi: https://pypi.org/project/pathtools/ and that's where your spec file points to

You may want to reach out to upstream to notify them of this and see if they can fix it.

Hi Pierre, thanks for taking a look and apologies about the file not working. I've updated my comment below with working links:

Spec URL: https://scoady.fedorapeople.org/python-pathtools.spec
SRPM URL: https://scoady.fedorapeople.org/python-pathtools-0.1.2-20.fc31.src.rpm
Description: Bumped version for python-pathtools to unorphan it
Fedora Account System Username: scoady

I will reach out on the repo upstream and see if they can fix it. Thanks.

- License is ok
- Latest version packaged
- Build in koji/rawhide: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=39797602
- No rpmlint error
  - 1 warning: python-pathtools.src: W: strange-permission pathtools-0.1.2.tar.gz 400
      I guess this is an artifact of how you created the srpm and thus should be fine to ignore
- Conforms to Packaging Guidelines

Package is approved.

Being a sponsor in the packager group I will sponsor you but before I do so, I would like to see you perform an (informal) package review. Could pick a package to review from the list of pending reviews, do its informal review and add me on CC to it?

You can find some information about the package review at: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process

Thanks, I have CC'd you on a review I performed here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1786962

Hi Pierre, do you think this is ready? My review above was accepted by someone else so you may have missed it.

Hi Stephen,

I saw it. I wanted to ask you to do another one in another domain (ie: another language or so) but considering this is blocking other folks, I'll go ahead and sponsor you :)

Welcome to the packager group, use your power wisely :)

you can now request the new package to be added to Fedora (fedpkg request-repo) and the branches you want to support (fedpkg request-branch)

Let me know if you have any questions!

FEDORA-2020-9ed005ecfd has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-9ed005ecfd

python-pathtools-0.1.2-20.fc31 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 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-2020-9ed005ecfd

python-pathtools-0.1.2-20.fc31 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.