Bug 503592

Summary: Review Request: python-sprox - A package for creation of web widgets directly from database schema
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Luke Macken <lmacken>
Component: Package ReviewAssignee: Brennan Ashton <bashton>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideCC: bashton, fedora-package-review, notting, panemade, pfrields
Target Milestone: ---Flags: bashton: fedora-review+
j: fedora-cvs+
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: 0.6.3-1.fc11 Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2009-08-05 00:38:29 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: 503591    

Description Luke Macken 2009-06-01 19:52:29 UTC
Spec URL: http://lmacken.fedorapeople.org/rpms/python-sprox.spec
SRPM URL: http://lmacken.fedorapeople.org/rpms/python-sprox-0.5.5-1.fc10.src.rpm
Description: 
Sprox is a widget generation library that has a slightly different take on the problem of creating custom web content directly from database schemas. Sprox provides an easy way to create forms for web content which are: automatically generated, easy to customize, and validated. Sprox also has powerful tools to help you display your content the way you want to with table and record viewers. Sprox provides a way to fill your widgets, whether they are forms or other content with customizable data.

Comment 1 Parag AN(पराग) 2009-06-03 04:41:07 UTC
Review:
+ package builds in mock (rawhide i586).
koji Build => http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1390410
+ rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM.
+ source files match upstream url
b41d9b4b4fa5a459c29dec0df14c0e83d603b867  sprox-0.5.5.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.
+ %clean is present.
+ 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.

Should:
1) add PKG_INFO to %doc
2) any reason to remove tests directory?

Comment 2 Parag AN(पराग) 2009-06-24 08:22:23 UTC
ping?

Comment 3 Luke Macken 2009-07-10 15:48:55 UTC
Regarding #1, There is no need to package the PKG-INFO, as it is merely setuptools egg metadata that is already contained in the package as /usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/sprox-0.6.1-py2.5.egg-info/PKG-INFO

Regarding #2, I remove the tests for a couple of reasons.  First, they get installed into %{python_sitelib}/tests, instead of /sprox/tests.  Second, after they are run in %check, they do not provide much value to ship within the package.  If we really want them, we can move them to the proper location.

Comment 4 Luke Macken 2009-07-21 21:29:21 UTC
ping?

Comment 5 Parag AN(पराग) 2009-07-22 05:54:05 UTC
oops I forgot to remove myself from this review like I did for your other reviews.

Comment 6 Brennan Ashton 2009-07-26 18:47:09 UTC
this also looks clean to me.  I see no need for those tests,as long as they are run at build. Some times it is nice to have the tests for example code, but I do not see a need for that in this case.

Why did these reviews get dropped this late in the review stage?

I see no reason to APPROVE this package.

Go ahead for CVS.

Comment 7 Luke Macken 2009-07-31 01:12:49 UTC
(In reply to comment #6)
> this also looks clean to me.  I see no need for those tests,as long as they are
> run at build. Some times it is nice to have the tests for example code, but I
> do not see a need for that in this case.
> 
> Why did these reviews get dropped this late in the review stage?

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=507695

> I see no reason to APPROVE this package.
> 
> Go ahead for CVS.  

Thanks for picking this up, Brennan.  I assume you mean "I see no reason not to APPROVE this package"?

Comment 8 Luke Macken 2009-07-31 01:29:48 UTC
New Package CVS Request
======================
Package Name: python-sprox
Short Description: A package for creation of web widgets directly from database schema
Owners: lmacken
Branches: F-10 F-11 EL-5

Comment 9 Brennan Ashton 2009-07-31 05:51:46 UTC
That is correct sir. Just trying to do what I can to get TG2 up and running, I use it a lot for work.

Comment 10 Jason Tibbitts 2009-07-31 21:15:19 UTC
CVS done.

Comment 11 Fedora Update System 2009-08-03 21:16:05 UTC
python-sprox-0.6.3-1.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-sprox-0.6.3-1.fc11

Comment 12 Fedora Update System 2009-08-05 00:38:24 UTC
python-sprox-0.6.3-1.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.