Bug 238932
| Summary: | Review Request: python-decoratortools - Use class and function decorators -- even in Python 2.3 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Luke Macken <lmacken> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Toshio Kuratomi <toshio> |
| Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | pfrields, toshio |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | toshio:
fedora-review+
wtogami: fedora-cvs+ |
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2007-05-10 00:53:51 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: | |||
|
Description
Luke Macken
2007-05-03 22:35:06 UTC
First glance, this line looks suspect::
%dir %{python_sitelib}/peak/util/decorators.py*
Usually I'd say that we should package peak in order to get the peak/util/
directory. But it appears that peak is serving as a namespace package for
decoratortools so I'm not sure what the proper thing to do is. decoratortools
doesn't acutally require anything else provided by peak, just the directory
structure....
Oops, I didn't mean to put that %dir there. I removed it and updated the spec/srpm. As for the peak namespace, it would be nice to have something else provide the peak/util, but I don't really see it as too big of a deal -- however, I'm not on the packaging committee.. so it's your call :) Spec URL: http://lewk.org/python-decoratortools.spec SRPM URL: http://lewk.org/python-decoratortools-1.4-2.fc7.src.rpm * Tue May 8 2007 Luke Macken <lmacken> - 1.4-2 - Own the peak namespace, for now. Approved
MD5Sums:
20789f305884614948f191ce7458d377 python-decoratortools-1.4-2.fc7.src.rpm
Good:
* rpmlint output:
W: python-decoratortools invalid-license PSF or ZPL
W: python-decoratortools invalid-license PSF or ZPL
PSF is python software foundation license and ZPL is Zope Public License,
both valid licenses for Fedora.
* Package and spec follow the naming guidelines for Python Modules.
* License filed matches the license of the package and is approved for Fedora.
(Listed in the PKG-INFO file)
* Source file matches upstream.
* Builds to a noarch package on x86_64 FC6.
* Successfully builds in mock.
* No locale files.
* Not a dynamic library.
* Not relocatable.
* Package owns all directories that it creates. Note that the
%{python_sitelib}/peak directory structure is a namespace directory. Contrary
to what I said earlier on IRC, this appears to be covered by this:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#FileAndDirectoryOwnership
* No duplicate files.
* Proper %clean.
* Consistent use of macros.
* Not a GUI app
* Works for the simple examples included in the documentation.
Minor:
* License text is not included in the upstream package. Might want to ping
upstream about including that.
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: python-decoratortools Short Description: Use class and function decorators -- even in Python 2.3 Owners: lmacken,toshio Branches: FC-6 EL-5 InitialCC: toshio Imported, tagged and built. Thanks! |