Fedora Account System
Red Hat Associate
Red Hat Customer
Spec URL: https://mattdm.org/misc/fedora/pywaffle/python-pywaffle.spec SRPM URL: https://mattdm.org/misc/fedora/pywaffle/python-pywaffle-0.6.3-1.20210728git0857bae.fc35.mattdm.src.rpm Description: PyWaffle is an open source, MIT-licensed Python package for plotting waffle charts. It provides a `Figure` constructor class `Waffle`, which can be passed to `matplotlib.pyplot.figure` to generate a matplotlib `Figure` object. Note that the Fedora package has been modified to use the system version of FontAwesome. Fedora Account System Username: mattdm
*** Bug 2011908 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
There is no need to stuff the snapshot information into the release tag. Do something like this instead: --- python-pywaffle.spec +++ python-pywaffle.spec @@ -2 +1,0 @@ -%global pypi_version 0.6.3 @@ -4,0 +4 @@ +%global commitdate 20210728 @@ -9,2 +9,2 @@ Name: python-%{pypi_name} -Version: %{pypi_version} -Release: %{autorelease -s 20210728git%{shortcommit}} +Version: 0.6.3^%{commitdate}git%{shortcommit} +Release: %autorelease + package name is OK + license is acceptable for Fedora (MIT) + license is specified correctly + builds and installs OK + BR/R/P look OK + fedora-review finds no issues (except some false positives) + rpmlint: python3-pywaffle.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US matplotlib -> diplomatist python3-pywaffle.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pyplot -> plot python3-pywaffle.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/pywaffle/__init__.py 644 /usr/bin/python python3-pywaffle.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/pywaffle/fontawesome/__init__.py 644 /usr/bin/python python3-pywaffle.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/pywaffle/waffle.py 644 /usr/bin/python 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 2 warnings. Those can all be ignored. I'm not keen on all those macros. It's a matter of preference, but let me just say that github repo naming is case-insensitive, so you could just use "pywaffle" everywhere and everything should work… Package is APPROVED. Please consider using the more modern version-release split as suggested above.
Thanks for the review! > There is no need to stuff the snapshot information into the release tag. Okay. We should probably update https://docs.pagure.org/Fedora-Infra.rpmautospec/autorelease.html, which is where I got the idea that that's now a good place to put it. I'll change that, and look at simplifying the macros. Thanks again!
(In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #2) > I'm not keen on all those macros. It's a matter of preference, but let me > just say that github repo > naming is case-insensitive, so you could just use "pywaffle" everywhere and > everything should work… Unfortunately no, because the PyWaffle variant is still used in the directory name in the github tarball.
> We should probably update https://docs.pagure.org/Fedora-Infra.rpmautospec/autorelease.html https://pagure.io/fedora-infra/rpmautospec/pull-request/222
Several comments, nothing really bad, just nit-picks: > %{?python_provide:%python_provide python3-%{pypi_name}} This is deprecated and should not be used. It more or less does nothing. > python3 pywaffle/scripts/get_fontawesome.py %{python3} should be used, so it is possible to build the spec file with a different Python version (unlikely to be needed, but at least consistent). > %global pypi_name pywaffle > %global pypi_version 0.6.3 > %global githubname PyWaffle I highly recommend not doing this. It makes the spec file harder to read and the benefit is minimal, it is not like I could take the spec file, copy it, change the values and use it without changes for another package. Using the literal values in the spec file makes it easier to understand. > %license LICENSE This is not needed, as the LICENSE file is listed and marked as %license in %{pyproject_files}: $ rpm -ql --licensefiles -p python3-pywaffle-0.6.3-1.20210728git0857bae.fc36.noarch.rpm /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/pywaffle-0.6.3.dist-info/LICENSE /usr/share/licenses/python3-pywaffle/LICENSE (On Fedora 34 or EPEL 9 the file is installed, but not marked as %license.)
(In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #5) > > We should probably update https://docs.pagure.org/Fedora-Infra.rpmautospec/autorelease.html > https://pagure.io/fedora-infra/rpmautospec/pull-request/222 Ah, so... pending infra docs PR. I'll see what I can do to push that along. Thanks! (In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #6) > Several comments, nothing really bad, just nit-picks: Cool, thanks. I'll respond with my naïve comments in the related thread on our python-devel list.
Package was never imported, resetting ticket status.
This is an automatic check from review-stats script. This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time. We're sorry it is taking so long. If you're still interested in packaging this software into Fedora repositories, please respond to this comment clearing the NEEDINFO flag. You may want to update the specfile and the src.rpm to the latest version available and to propose a review swap on Fedora devel mailing list to increase chances to have your package reviewed. If this is your first package and you need a sponsor, you may want to post some informal reviews. Read more at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group. Without any reply, this request will shortly be considered abandoned and will be closed. Thank you for your patience.
This is an automatic action taken by review-stats script. The ticket submitter failed to clear the NEEDINFO flag in a month. As per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews we consider this ticket as DEADREVIEW and proceed to close it.