Spec URL: http://ianweller.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/python-flickrapi/1.1-4/python-flickrapi.spec SRPM URL: http://ianweller.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/python-flickrapi/1.1-4/python-flickrapi-1.1-4.fc9.src.rpm Description: A Python module for interfacing with the Flickr API.
Automated result from review-o-matic http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=900239 3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
This looks rather clean; I guess I could point out that the first line of the spec is kind of meaningless and should be removed. I note that there is a test suite, but it talks to flickr's servers so it can't be run automatically. However, I did run it and found that two of the tests fail. One fails because a file tests/photo.jpg is missing (maybe I'm supposed to provide it myself), and a second fails like so: File "/home/tibbs/work/rpm/python-flickrapi-1.1/flickrapi-1.1/flickrapi/multipart.py", line 16, in flickrapi.multipart.Part Failed example: Part({'name': 'photo', 'filename': image}, image.read(), 'image/jpeg') # doctest: +ELLIPSIS Exception raised: Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/lib/python2.5/doctest.py", line 1212, in __run compileflags, 1) in test.globs File "<doctest flickrapi.multipart.Part[2]>", line 1, in <module> Part({'name': 'photo', 'filename': image}, image.read(), 'image/jpeg') NameError: name 'image' is not defined Perhaps you can make some sense of that. It would be nice to have an explanation before importing a package with known test failures. * source files match upstream: 0f6e10738d87ff81a47c4841dab735c56e1d00ed1ce755ab0b603abc2e640974 flickrapi-1.1.tar.gz * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text not included upstream * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64). * package installs properly. * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: python-flickrapi = 1.1-4.fc10 = python(abi) = 2.5 * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no generically named files * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
Ping? I'm thinking that test suite failure is simply due to not having supplied an appropriate jpeg file. If you could confirm a successful test suite run then I see no reason this couldn't be approved.
Created attachment 323272 [details] Running of test suite with image I'm assuming you mean this test suite, and I'm assuming that if it doesn't return anything then it succeeded.
Yes, I think that's what I'm looking for. APPROVED
CVS Admin: So this should be interesting, since Kushal has gotten this package approved and CVS branched but has effectively given up maintaining the package (see bug 457690). I'll consider it a change request. Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: python-flickrapi Updated Description: Python module for interfacing with the Flickr API Owners: ianweller
cvs done.
python-flickrapi-1.1-4.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-flickrapi-1.1-4.fc9
python-flickrapi-1.1-4.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-flickrapi-1.1-4.fc10
python-flickrapi-1.1-4.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
python-flickrapi-1.1-4.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.