Spec URL: http://lmacken.fedorapeople.org/rpms/python-sprox.spec SRPM URL: http://lmacken.fedorapeople.org/rpms/python-sprox-0.5.5-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Sprox is a widget generation library that has a slightly different take on the problem of creating custom web content directly from database schemas. Sprox provides an easy way to create forms for web content which are: automatically generated, easy to customize, and validated. Sprox also has powerful tools to help you display your content the way you want to with table and record viewers. Sprox provides a way to fill your widgets, whether they are forms or other content with customizable data.
Review: + package builds in mock (rawhide i586). koji Build => http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1390410 + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. + source files match upstream url b41d9b4b4fa5a459c29dec0df14c0e83d603b867 sprox-0.5.5.tar.gz + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code, not content. + no headers or static libraries. + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage + no .la files. + no translations are available + Does owns the directories it creates. + no scriptlets present. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. Should: 1) add PKG_INFO to %doc 2) any reason to remove tests directory?
ping?
Regarding #1, There is no need to package the PKG-INFO, as it is merely setuptools egg metadata that is already contained in the package as /usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/sprox-0.6.1-py2.5.egg-info/PKG-INFO Regarding #2, I remove the tests for a couple of reasons. First, they get installed into %{python_sitelib}/tests, instead of /sprox/tests. Second, after they are run in %check, they do not provide much value to ship within the package. If we really want them, we can move them to the proper location.
oops I forgot to remove myself from this review like I did for your other reviews.
this also looks clean to me. I see no need for those tests,as long as they are run at build. Some times it is nice to have the tests for example code, but I do not see a need for that in this case. Why did these reviews get dropped this late in the review stage? I see no reason to APPROVE this package. Go ahead for CVS.
(In reply to comment #6) > this also looks clean to me. I see no need for those tests,as long as they are > run at build. Some times it is nice to have the tests for example code, but I > do not see a need for that in this case. > > Why did these reviews get dropped this late in the review stage? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=507695 > I see no reason to APPROVE this package. > > Go ahead for CVS. Thanks for picking this up, Brennan. I assume you mean "I see no reason not to APPROVE this package"?
New Package CVS Request ====================== Package Name: python-sprox Short Description: A package for creation of web widgets directly from database schema Owners: lmacken Branches: F-10 F-11 EL-5
That is correct sir. Just trying to do what I can to get TG2 up and running, I use it a lot for work.
CVS done.
python-sprox-0.6.3-1.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-sprox-0.6.3-1.fc11
python-sprox-0.6.3-1.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.