Bug 695022
| Summary: | Review Request: pygtkhelpers - assists the building of PyGTK applications | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Lukas Zapletal <lzap> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it <nobody> |
| Status: | CLOSED DUPLICATE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | boni.vivek, fedora-package-review, gwync, mail, notting, tomspur |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2011-12-13 14:09:33 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: | 651853 | ||
|
Description
Lukas Zapletal
2011-04-09 19:55:29 UTC
Hi,
I tried updating to the latest version of pida, but it depends on pygtkhelpers in order to run. Can you please get this package through soon, so that I can push it in.
(In reply to comment #1) > Hi, > I tried updating to the latest version of pida, but it depends on > pygtkhelpers in order to run. Can you please get this package through soon, so > that I can push it in. How about reviewing it then? ;) The spec looks fine on a brief view, except the "Requires: python(abi) = 2.7". That's added automatically and, when python gets an update to an other version than 2.7, this won't work anymore. Just some quick comments:
- The website and the LICENSE.txt claims that the license is LGPL and not GPL.
- There are examples in the source. Wouldn't it be a good idea to put those examples in a subpackage?
- The '%{!?python_sitearch:...' line is not needed.
- I don't think that console.py needs 755. Removing the shebang can calm rpmlint down.
All done. Please do formal review, thank you. [lzap@lzapx i686]$ rpmlint pygtkhelpers-*.rpm pygtkhelpers.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US frameworky -> framework, frameworks, framework y pygtkhelpers.i686: E: no-binary pygtkhelpers-debuginfo.i686: E: empty-debuginfo-package 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 1 warnings. [lzap@lzapx SRPMS]$ rpmlint pygtkhelpers-0.4.2-2.f15.src.rpm pygtkhelpers.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US frameworky -> framework, frameworks, framework y 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. http://lzap.fedorapeople.org/fedora-packaging/pygtkhelpers/0.4.2-2/ (In reply to comment #4) > [lzap@lzapx i686]$ rpmlint pygtkhelpers-*.rpm > pygtkhelpers.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US frameworky -> > framework, frameworks, framework y > pygtkhelpers.i686: E: no-binary > pygtkhelpers-debuginfo.i686: E: empty-debuginfo-package > 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 1 warnings. This package only installs into %{python_sitelib} and not in %{python_sitearch}, so this package can be noarch and no debuginfo package will be generated. I think the license is unclear... The website links to LGPLv3 and there is a LGPLv3 LICENSE file in it, but the header say LGPLv2+, it would be best to clarify that. Upstream contacted for the clarification. Any update? Ping? python-logbook is in, this is the only blocker for latest pida now. Though, thinking about it, if the headers say, LGPLv2+, and the website says LPGLv3, I would think you could just call it LGPLv3, include the license file, and be done with it. Block FE-LEGAL for review if you're not sure. Ping? Ping? I'd really like to fix PIDA. . . (In reply to comment #11) > Ping? I'd really like to fix PIDA. . . This looks stalled. How about requesting a new review and closing this as a duplicate of the new one, Jon? (In reply to comment #0) > Spec URL: > http://lzap.fedorapeople.org/fedora-packaging/pygtkhelpers/0.4.2-1/pygtkhelpers.spec Looks ok without having a deeper look. Some comments: - R: on a hardcoded python version is bad. The R on the python(abi) is added automatically anyway, so leaving it out would be the best... - There is no BuildRoot defined, but %clean and rm -rf in %install. All is needed for builting in el5 and nothing is needed in Fedora, so you can choose what to do here. Will do. I have a -2, so I'll modify that to a -3 and post it. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 767185 *** |