| Summary: | Review Request: pyp - Python-centric command line text manipulation tool similar to awk and sed | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Mark McKinstry <mmckinst> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it <nobody> |
| Status: | CLOSED NOTABUG | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | misc, package-review |
| 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: | 2015-03-15 14:29:13 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
|
Description
Mark McKinstry
2012-03-20 22:16:55 UTC
Hi, a few comment : - why %doc without any doc ? - you requires python, but I think you need to tell the version ( 2 or 3 ) - BuildRoot is uneeded, unless you plan to support epel 5 ( if you need to do so, there is then others stuff, like %clean section, etc ) and there is no license at all in the source code ( nor shipped as part of a tarball, since there is no tarball ), which is a blocking point : https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#License_Text I've got a bug report with them about the licensing issue: https://code.google.com/p/pyp/issues/detail?id=9 . Once that is resolved, I'll fix the other issues you mentioned. The license is now included in the source code. I've updated the spec to include a clean section and explicitly state it requires python2. I do intend to have it in EPEL 5 so I've specified the buildroot. I also removed the un-needed doc section. spec: http://mmckinst.fedorapeople.org/packages/pyp/pyp.spec srpm: http://mmckinst.fedorapeople.org/packages/pyp/pyp-2.12-1.fc16.src.rpm Source0 and URL should be changed. I've fixed the URL and Source0. Although its just one file, I now check it out from svn so its clear which version is being used. spec: http://mmckinst.fedorapeople.org/packages/pyp/pyp.spec srpm: http://mmckinst.fedorapeople.org/packages/pyp/pyp-2.12-20120402.1.fc16.src.rpm - The 'Release' tag order should more look the example for kismet for a post-release [1][2]. - 'BuildRoot', the %clean section and the condition for el5 is only needed if you want to support EPEL5. In this case the %install section must be cleaned. [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Post-Release_packages [2] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Snapshot_packages I've updated the release tag to follow the packaging guidelines. I do intend to have it in EPEL 5 so I've specified the buildroot. spec: http://mmckinst.fedorapeople.org/packages/pyp/pyp.spec srpm: http://mmckinst.fedorapeople.org/packages/pyp/pyp-2.12-2.20120402.fc17.src.rpm This is just a single file, packaging it as an RPM is overkill. If someone else has interest they can take over the RPM. |