Spec URL: https://lbazan.fedorapeople.org/python-django-crispy-forms.spec SRPM URL: https://lbazan.fedorapeople.org/python-django-crispy-forms-1.7.2-1.fc28.src.rpm Description: The best way to have Django DRY forms. Build programmatic reusable layouts out of components, having full control of the rendered HTML without writing HTML in templates. All this without breaking the standard way of doing things in Django, so it plays nice with any other form application. Fedora Account System Username:lbazan
- Don't forget the python provide macro: %package -n python3-%{pypi_name} Summary: %{summary} - Python 3 version %{?python_provide:%python_provide python3-%{pypi_name}} - Be more specific in %files: %files -n python3-%{pypi_name} %doc LICENSE.txt README.rst %{python3_sitelib}/crispy_forms/ %{python3_sitelib}/%{pypi_name}-%{version}-py?.?.egg-info - Source0 needs https: Source0: https://pypi.python.org/packages/source/d/%{pypi_name}/%{pypi_name}-%{version}.tar.gz - No idea what you're trying to do here: rm -rf %{py3dir} cp -a . %{py3dir} find %{py3dir} -name '*.py' | xargs sed -i '1s|^#!python|#!%{__python3}|' %{py3dir} is not used for the build. And there's no file with a python shebang either. So you can remove this entire section. - LICENSE.txt must be installed with %license, not %doc: %files -n python3-%{pypi_name} %license LICENSE.txt %doc README.rst - Remove the tab in this line: Summary: %{summary} - Python 3 version Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - 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. Note: License file LICENSE.txt is not marked as %license See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text ===== 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. Licenses found: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "Unknown or generated". 318 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/python-django-crispy-forms/review-python- django-crispy-forms/licensecheck.txt [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python3.7/site- packages, /usr/lib/python3.7 [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. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 2 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]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [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). [?]: 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]: 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]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [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. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: python3-django-crispy-forms-1.7.2-1.fc29.noarch.rpm python-django-crispy-forms-1.7.2-1.fc29.src.rpm python-django-crispy-forms.src:25: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 3, tab: line 25) 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
Hi Robert New SRPMS https://lbazan.fedorapeople.org/python-django-crispy-forms-1.7.2-2.fc28.src.rpm New SPEC: https://lbazan.fedorapeople.org/python-django-crispy-forms.spec Best!
Package approved.
(fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-django-crispy-forms
python-django-crispy-forms-1.7.2-2.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-8d9d8ed9aa
python-django-crispy-forms-1.7.2-2.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-8d9d8ed9aa
python-django-crispy-forms-1.7.2-2.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.