Spec URL: http://jenselme.perso.centrale-marseille.fr/visible/SPECS/python-sphinx-theme-alabaster.spec SRPM URL: http://jenselme.perso.centrale-marseille.fr/visible/SRPMS/python-sphinx-theme-alabaster-0.7.6-1.fc22.src.rpm Description: This theme is a modified "Kr" Sphinx theme from @kennethreitz (especially as used in his Requests project), which was itself originally based on @mitsuhiko's theme used for Flask & related projects. Fedora Account System Username: jujens
- Remove %%py3dir macro - Add CFLAGS in %%build Spec URL: http://jenselme.perso.centrale-marseille.fr/visible/SPECS/python-sphinx-theme-alabaster.spec SRPM URL: http://jenselme.perso.centrale-marseille.fr/visible/SRPMS/python-sphinx-theme-alabaster-0.7.6-1.fc22.src.rpm
The comments about Provides:python2-..., separate build dirs, and _docdir_fmt from #1244514 also apply here.
- Upgrade to the new macros available for >F22: CFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS" %{__python2} setup.py build -> %py2_build CFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS" %{__python3} setup.py build -> %py3_build %{__python2} setup.py install --skip-build --root %{buildroot} -> %py2_install %{__python3} setup.py install --skip-build --root %{buildroot} -> %py3_install
SPEC: http://jenselme.perso.centrale-marseille.fr/visible/SPECS/python-sphinx-theme-alabaster.spec SRPM: http://jenselme.perso.centrale-marseille.fr/visible/SRPMS/python-sphinx-theme-alabaster-0.7.6-3.fc22.src.rpm @Eduardo: Currently I have only seen those macro in https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Tibbs/PythonCleanup2 As far as I know, this document is not yet definitive nor approved. Are those macro ready for use? Should I define them if they are not defined?
@Julien There is a update to the Python Packaging wiki, please see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Example_spec_file Need work: ========== 1- There is not more %files please use %files -n python2-%{pypi_name} 2- Define the python2-%{pypi_name} subpackage, yes now Python 2 and 3 packages are subpackages for the same spec. 3- Yes you can use %py3_install, %py2_install, %py3_build and %py2_build if you want to go to epel and F21 you need to define it with %global Also note this: "Our method in building from the same code to make the two separate modules is to keep each build as independent as possible. To do that, we copy the source tree to python3 so that the python 2 sources are entirely independent from the python 3 sources." So I will recomend than you use a diferent directory to build the python 2 and 3 package. Please update the spec and I will run the review
(In reply to William Moreno from comment #5) > "Our method in building from the same code to make the two separate modules > is to keep each build as independent as possible. To do that, we copy the > source tree to python3 so that the python 2 sources are entirely independent > from the python 3 sources." Removing that part of the guidelines was one of the changes to the guidelines, explicitly voted on and approved. Please see the example spec file at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Example_common_spec_file. So there's no need to do that step, unless the installation is actually broken without it. (I see that the link you posted is already dead... so it seems that the guidelines are being changed as we speak).
I've moved all sorts of new stuff into place but I shouldn't be doing any significant reorganization, just fixing typos and documenting some of the new macros. Do keep in mind that both the "build in one directory" and the "build in separate subdirectories" are still supported. It's just that the former is simpler, assuming it works. The latter was merely moved to the appendix. It shouldn't be long before the new macros are in F21 as well, but the old guidelines are still there and perfectly valid if you want to support multiple releases. They're just... far less pleasant and won't handle the future change in the system version of python.
- Use %%py2_build, %%py3build, %%py2_install and %%py2_install - Make a python2 subpackage I continue to build in the same directory since it doesn't seem to causes trouble. SPEC: http://jenselme.perso.centrale-marseille.fr/visible/SPECS/python-sphinx-theme-alabaster.spec SRMP: http://jenselme.perso.centrale-marseille.fr/visible/SRPMS/python-sphinx-theme-alabaster-0.7.6-4.fc22.src.rpm
Build fine in Rawhide : http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=10574756 I will run a full review
Package Review ============== ===== MUST items ===== Generic: [X]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [X]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. No licenses found. Please check the source files for licenses manually. [X]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [X]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [X]: Changelog in prescribed format. [X]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [X]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [X]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [X]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [X]: Package does not generate any conflict. [X]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [X]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [X]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [X]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [X]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. [X]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %license. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package does not use a name that already exists. [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local Python: [X]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process. [X]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should provide egg info. [X]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python [x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel [x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [X]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. [X]: Package functions as described. [X]: Latest version is packaged. [X]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [X]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. [X]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
PACKAGE APROVED ===============
Thanks for the review! New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: python-sphinx-theme-alabaster Short Description: Configurable sidebar-enabled Sphinx theme Upstream URL: https://pypi.python.org/pypi/alabaster Owners: jujens Branches: f22 f23 InitialCC:
Git done (by process-git-requests).
python-sphinx-theme-alabaster-0.7.6-4.fc22 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 22. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-sphinx-theme-alabaster-0.7.6-4.fc22
python-sphinx-theme-alabaster-0.7.6-4.fc23 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 23. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-sphinx-theme-alabaster-0.7.6-4.fc23
python-sphinx-theme-alabaster-0.7.6-4.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository.
python-sphinx-theme-alabaster-0.7.6-4.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository.
python-sphinx-theme-alabaster-0.7.6-4.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository.