Bug 513775 - Review Request: pyfuzzy - Python framework for fuzzy sets
Summary: Review Request: pyfuzzy - Python framework for fuzzy sets
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED NEXTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Jason Tibbitts
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2009-07-25 17:45 UTC by Fabian Affolter
Modified: 2011-01-03 20:40 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2011-01-03 20:40:24 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
j: fedora-review+
j: fedora-cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Fabian Affolter 2009-07-25 17:45:36 UTC
Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/pyfuzzy.spec
SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/pyfuzzy-0.0.2-1.fc11.src.rpm

Project URL: https://sourceforge.net/projects/pyfuzzy/

Description:
pyfuzzy is a framework to work with fuzzy sets and process them with
operations of fuzzy logic.

Koji scratch build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1513784

rpmlint output:
[fab@laptop09 SRPMS]$ rpmlint pyfuzzy-0.0.2-1.fc11.src.rpm 
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

[fab@laptop09 noarch]$ rpmlint pyfuzzy-0.0.2-1.fc11.noarch.rpm 
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

Comment 1 Mads Kiilerich 2009-07-26 00:29:41 UTC
After a briew review I wanted to point out that the license is GPL, not GPL+ ... but ... you are right, GPL is GPL+.

Sligtly annoying that the rpm with the name pyfuzzy and with a pyfuzzy egg occupies the name fuzzy from the namespace. IMHO python-fuzzy would have been more appropriate, but who cares ...

nuff said

Comment 2 Jason Tibbitts 2009-07-30 00:24:40 UTC
Well, the name is correct according to the guidelines.  The upstream project is 'pyfuzzy', the tarball is 'pyfuzy', and it has 'py' in the name so no 'python-' prefix is necessary.  'python-fuzzy', on the other hand, would be against the guidelines.  Perl at least has this handled with the 'perl(Foo::Bar)' automatic dependencies.

Also, GPL and GPL+ are not the same thing, as the author could choose not to use the "any later version" option.  Of course, they didn't actually specify anything but "GPL" in one place, but Fabian has already requested that upstream fix that up so in the meantime we assume GPL+.  Of course, upstream seems to be completely idle for the past six years, so...

There's a test suite.  You can call the individual tests with:
  %check
  cd test
  export PYTHONPATH=%{buildroot}/%{python_sitelib}
  ./test_defuzzyfication.py
  ./test_merge.py
  ./test_norm.py
  ./test_set.py
(or you could use a loop or something).  However, only test_defuzzyfication seems to work.  It looks like there may be an issue with outdated python syntax.  Could you double-check?  If the module has issues with python 2.6 then it would be better to know that up front instead of after it gets imported and built.


* source files match upstream.  sha256sum:            
   c3cc76ad5283e38b540db29b1cb56fff671fbe0d94a2808fa219896833f5a417
   pyfuzzy-0.0.2.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:
   pyfuzzy = 0.0.2-1.fc12
  =
   gnuplot
   python(abi) = 2.6

? %check is not present, but there seem to be some tests.
* 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.


The package review process needs reviewers!  If you haven't done any package
reviews recently, please consider doing one.

Comment 3 Fabian Affolter 2009-07-31 13:22:40 UTC
I reported all issues upstream.  It's right that there was no release in the last 6 years but there was some action in the VCS in January.

All issues are reported upstream.

Comment 5 Fabian Affolter 2009-10-07 14:09:12 UTC
According to upstream a new release will come out soon.

Comment 6 Jason Tibbitts 2009-11-03 15:37:49 UTC
Any update?

Comment 7 Fabian Affolter 2009-11-13 20:32:42 UTC
The guy from upstream is still working on a new release.

Comment 8 René Liebscher 2009-11-14 13:46:43 UTC
Hi, I am always working on new releases, but you might have missed the last one from 2009-10-18, see https://sourceforge.net/projects/pyfuzzy/files/.

Comment 9 Fabian Affolter 2009-11-14 16:44:13 UTC
Hmmm, I missed that. I will provide a new package soon.

Comment 11 Jason Tibbitts 2010-01-07 23:29:29 UTC
I seem to have let this fall through the cracks, sorry about that.  The current version builds fine and rpmlint is silent.

The license of the code seems to be LGPLv3+.  LICENSE.txt has the LGPLv3 text, and the source files all seem to have the proper LGPLv3 license block with the "any later version" text, and setup.py says "LGPL".  Did I miss something?

I don't see any mention of the test suite in your comments, but the test files seem to have disappeared in the latest source so I suppose that's OK.

Comment 12 Fabian Affolter 2010-02-24 21:06:44 UTC
(In reply to comment #11)
> The license of the code seems to be LGPLv3+.  LICENSE.txt has the LGPLv3 text,
> and the source files all seem to have the proper LGPLv3 license block with the
> "any later version" text, and setup.py says "LGPL".  Did I miss something?

The license is LGPLv3+

> I don't see any mention of the test suite in your comments, but the test files
> seem to have disappeared in the latest source so I suppose that's OK.    

Starting with 0.1.0 the test suite is no longer included. 

Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/pyfuzzy.spec
SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/pyfuzzy-0.1.0-2.fc12.src.rpm

Comment 13 Jason Tibbitts 2010-11-18 13:52:13 UTC
Looks good, thanks.

APPROVED

Comment 14 Fabian Affolter 2010-11-20 13:05:14 UTC
New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: pyfuzzy
Short Description: Python framework for fuzzy sets
Owners: fab
Branches: F-14 F-13
InitialCC:

Comment 15 Jason Tibbitts 2010-11-22 13:43:49 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 16 Jason Tibbitts 2010-12-22 17:33:42 UTC
Is there any reason why this ticket is still open?

Comment 17 Fabian Affolter 2011-01-03 20:40:24 UTC
No


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