This service will be undergoing maintenance at 00:00 UTC, 2016-09-28. It is expected to last about 1 hours
Bug 233802 - Review Request: python-xlib - Fully functional X client library for Python programs
Review Request: python-xlib - Fully functional X client library for Python pr...
Status: CLOSED NEXTRELEASE
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review (Show other bugs)
rawhide
All Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Rex Dieter
Fedora Package Reviews List
:
Depends On:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2007-03-25 01:57 EDT by Jef Spaleta
Modified: 2013-12-10 13:36 EST (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2007-04-15 01:24:16 EDT
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
rdieter: fedora‑review+
limburgher: fedora‑cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Jef Spaleta 2007-03-25 01:57:52 EDT
Spec URL:
http://jspaleta.thecodergeek.com/Fedora%20SRPMS/python-xlib/python-xlib.spec
SRPM URL:
http://jspaleta.thecodergeek.com/Fedora%20SRPMS/python-xlib/python-xlib-0.13-1.fc7.src.rpm
Description:
The Python X Library is a complete X11R6 client-side implementation, 
written in pure Python. It can be used to write low-levelish X Windows 
client applications in Python.

Additional Notes:
This package is a new requirement for the newly released istanbul 0.2.2 

Mock fedora-development-x86 logs available in: http://jspaleta.thecodergeek.com/Fedora%20SRPMS/python-xlib/
rpmlint returns clean
Comment 1 Rex Dieter 2007-03-25 08:45:36 EDT
I can review this coming week (if no one else gets to it before then).

On first glance, packaging looks good/clean, my only suggestion would be to
shorten summary a wee bit to something like:
Summary: X client library for Python
Comment 2 Jef Spaleta 2007-03-25 18:07:59 EDT
I'll shorten the summary, in the next srpm/spec set. Though I'm going to hold
off on bumping a release of the spec until I know if there's something else I
need to change. I hate bumping submission revs for individual non-critical build
or run time booboos.

-jef
Comment 3 Jef Spaleta 2007-04-06 18:11:04 EDT
Updated for the summary text change suggestion
http://jspaleta.thecodergeek.com/Fedora%20SRPMS/python-xlib/python-xlib-0.13-2.fc7.src.rpm
http://jspaleta.thecodergeek.com/Fedora%20SRPMS/python-xlib/python-xlib.spec

So uhm, Rex, anytime you want to start that official review that would be great.

-jef
Comment 4 Rex Dieter 2007-04-09 16:21:48 EDT
plate... full... but... eating as ... fast as I can... 

alright, I'm ready for a review now.
Comment 5 Rex Dieter 2007-04-09 16:33:53 EDT
sorry for the delay, this one's simple enough, and looks good.

Wow, I don't recall ever actually witnesseing a 100% clean (w/o warnings)
rpmlint on a package under review before either.  neat.

My only possible suggestion would be to split the ~660K-ish docs into a separate
package (-doc), to ease the runtime weight of python-xlibs.

APPROVED.
Comment 6 Jef Spaleta 2007-04-11 00:42:38 EDT
Okay I spun a new version with a separate doc subpackage
if you have a second please take a quick look at the binaries in 
http://jspaleta.thecodergeek.com/Fedora%20SRPMS/python-xlib/devel/

-jef
Comment 7 Jef Spaleta 2007-04-11 00:46:28 EDT
New Package CVS Request
=======================
Package Name: python-xlib 
Short Description: X client library for Python
Owners: jspaleta@gmail.com
Branches: FC-6
InitialCC: 
Comment 8 Rex Dieter 2007-04-11 07:50:58 EDT
Looks good, except you prolly don't want/need
%doc README COPYING
in *both* packages (just the main one).
Comment 9 Orion Poplawski 2013-10-14 16:10:18 EDT
I would like to see this in EPEL6.  Would you be willing to support it there, or should I?
Comment 10 Orion Poplawski 2013-12-10 12:41:46 EST
Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: python-xlib
New Branches: el6
Owners: orion
InitialCC:
Comment 11 Jon Ciesla 2013-12-10 13:36:13 EST
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.