Bug 476350
Summary: | Review Request: python-networkx - Creates and Manipulates Graphs and Networks | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Conrad Meyer <cse.cem+redhatbugz> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Jason Tibbitts <j> |
Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | fedora-package-review, notting, p |
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | j:
fedora-review+
gwync: 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: | 2009-03-27 22:46:39 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
Conrad Meyer
2008-12-13 12:24:53 UTC
Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=996538 rpmlint says: python-networkx.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency python-matplotlib which is bogus. I can't find where the license is limited to LGPLv2 only. Nothing seems to mention a version, which would imply LGPLv2+. Or did I miss something? You also need to include the doc/GNU_LGPL.txt file as documentation. I wonder if it isn't a bit broken that rpm byte-compiles the examples. I'm not sure if there's a reasonable way to get it to stop doing so. There is some sort of included test suite. I don't know quite enough about python to know how to run it, though there are some instructions in networks/tests/README. You will quite a few additional build deps, of course. * source files match upstream. sha256sum: 8b65557c6048a2bc4d5fb0fe539139d3656d9c86367c89297ad40e12e90766ad networkx-0.99.tar.gz * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. X license field does not seem to match the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. X license text not included in package. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64). * package installs properly. * rpmlint has acceptable complaints. * final provides and requires are sane: python-networkx = 0.99-1.fc11 = PyYAML ipython numpy pydot python(abi) = 2.6 python-matplotlib scipy X %check is not present, but there's a runnable test suite. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no generically named files * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. Fixed the licensing issues and added a %check section. http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SPECS/python-networkx.spec http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SRPMS/python-networkx-0.99-2.fc10.src.rpm The licence stuff looks OK now. The %check section is there, but the tests seem to fail all over the place. I guess it's possible that they can't be run; at least something seems to want Gtk which would imply X. I'm not really sure. Also, if you're going to use the macro form %{__python} in the %build section (which is OK although I've never understood what it was supposed to be good for) you should also use it in %check if it turns out that there's any point in running the checks. I was only using '%{__python}' in %build because for whatever reason the rpmdevtools spectemplate for python uses it (I would prefer plain 'python'). Should I disable the checks for now? I've never understood why the template uses the macro form of the interpreter; I always remove it myself and you're free to do the same. The important thing is consistency. As for the checks, the point is for the packager to investigate the test suite and either enable it, enable as much as can be run by patching out the bits that can't, or to indicate that it's there but can't be run for whatever reason. I don't know what's the best course of action for this package, except to know that the first option obviously doesn't work. Switched all uses of %{__python} to python; commented out checks for now, with a note; replaced a %define with %global: http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SPECS/python-networkx.spec http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SRPMS/python-networkx-0.99-3.fc10.src.rpm Looks good, thanks. APPROVED Thanks! New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: python-networkx Short Description: Creates and Manipulates Graphs and Networks Owners: konradm Branches: F-10 InitialCC: cvs done. Imported and built: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1262327 Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: python-networkx New Branches: el6 epel7 Owners: jjames pbrady Git done (by process-git-requests). |