Bug 457690

1)you don't need again {%_docdir} remove it from %files
2) Add BuildRequires: python-setuptools

If I take out %{_docdir} I am getting

RPM build errors:
    Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found:
   /usr/share/doc/flickrapi-1.1/documentation.css
   /usr/share/doc/flickrapi-1.1/flickrapi.html
   /usr/share/doc/flickrapi-1.1/html4css1.css

Tell me what I should do ?

That happened because you tested on your machine where python-docutils is installed. So you need to add BR:python-docutils also you should install doc files in /usr/share/doc/python-flickrapi-1.1 instead to create one more directory /usr/share/doc/flickrapi-1.1

So,
1) Add BR:python-docutils
2) Add following in %install
rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_docdir}/*
3) your %doc should look like
  %doc README LICENSE doc/documentation.css doc/flickrapi.html doc/html4css1.css
4) don't include %{_docdir}/* in %files

(In reply to comment #3)
> That happened because you tested on your machine where python-docutils is
> installed. So you need to add BR:python-docutils also you should install doc
> files in /usr/share/doc/python-flickrapi-1.1 instead to create one more
> directory /usr/share/doc/flickrapi-1.1
> 
> So,
> 1) Add BR:python-docutils
> 2) Add following in %install
> rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_docdir}/*
> 3) your %doc should look like
>   %doc README LICENSE doc/documentation.css doc/flickrapi.html
> doc/html4css1.css
> 4) don't include %{_docdir}/* in %files

Spec URL: http://kushal.fedorapeople.org/python-flickrapi.spec
SRPM URL: http://kushal.fedorapeople.org/python-flickrapi-1.1-2.fc9.src.rpm


The new spec and SRPM

rpmlint gave me =>
python-flickrapi.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/flickrapi/__init__.py 0644
This text file contains a shebang or is located in a path dedicated for
executables, but lacks the executable bits and cannot thus be executed.  If
the file is meant to be an executable script, add the executable bits,
otherwise remove the shebang or move the file elsewhere.
==> Fix by removing shebang

Kushal,
  You can fix that in %install as
sed -i -e "s|#!/usr/bin/env python||" $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{python_sitelib}/flickrapi/__init__.py

(In reply to comment #6)
> Kushal,
>   You can fix that in %install as
> sed -i -e "s|#!/usr/bin/env python||"
> $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{python_sitelib}/flickrapi/__init__.py

Fixed :)

Spec URL: http://kushal.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-flickrapi.spec
SRPM URL: http://kushal.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-flickrapi-1.1-3.fc9.src.rpm

Review:
+ package builds in mock (rawhide i386).
koji build => http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=758909
+ rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM.
+ source files match upstream url
e51f57430629105dcec26a00eaa5fcae  flickrapi-1.1.tar.gz
+ package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
+ specfile is properly named, is cleanly written
+ Spec file is written in American English.
+ Spec file is legible.
+ dist tag is present.
+ build root is correct.
+ license is open source-compatible.
+ License text is included in package
+ BuildRequires are proper.
+ Compiler flags honored correctly.
+ defattr usage is correct.
+ %clean is present.
+ package installed properly.
+ Macro use appears rather consistent.
+ Package contains code, not content.
+ no headers or static libraries.
+ no .pc file present.
+ no -devel subpackage
+ no .la files.
+ no translations are available.
+ Does owns the directories it creates.
+ no scriptlets present.
+ no duplicates in %files.
+ file permissions are appropriate.
+ Not a GUI App.
APPROVED.

New Package CVS Request
=======================
Package Name: python-flickrapi
Short Description: python module for flickr api
Owners: kushal
Branches: F-9 EL5
InitialCC: kushal
Cvsextras Commits: yes

I think cvs is not created for this package so pushing back fedora-cvs flag to "?"

cvs done.

ping?
is this built already? If yes then you can CLOSE this review bug.

look like no interest from reporter to build this package.
Will Close this as NOTABUG this weekend.

Since Reporter seems not willing to update here, Closing this review.

I am not sure how to triage this package which have fedora-review+ and fedora-cvs+ where submitter don't want to add this to Fedora CVS. But I guess I can mark this review as FE-DEADREVIEW. If thats wrong correct me here.

I think we have also to kill the CVS branch.

Funny that I just recently became interested in this package. If I want to take over this package, would I need to resubmit the review request, or can we consider the package orphaned and I can take it over?

I guess its probably safer to pretend this ticket never existed.