Spec URL: http://lucabotti.fedorapeople.org/packages/django-robots.spec SRPM URL: http://lucabotti.fedorapeople.org/packages/django-robots-0.6.1-1.fc11.noarch.rpm Description: A Django app for managing robots.txt files following the robots exclusion protocol Need Sponsorship
(In reply to comment #0) > Spec URL: http://lucabotti.fedorapeople.org/packages/django-robots.spec > SRPM URL: > http://lucabotti.fedorapeople.org/packages/django-robots-0.6.1-1.fc11.noarch.rpm > Description: A Django app for managing robots.txt files following the robots > exclusion protocol > > Need Sponsorship Wrong SRPM URL: correct one is http://lucabotti.fedorapeople.org/packages/django-robots-0.6.1-1.fc11.src.rpm Still Need Sponsorship
Hello! I am not in the packager group and therefore I will not be able to APPROVE your package. I am only reviewing, trying to help. Here are my suggestions (I've annotated this diff http://mapleoin.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/robots.diff): --- django-robots.spec.orig 2009-08-25 23:41:41.000000000 +0300 +++ django-robots.spec 2009-09-08 18:33:51.713661335 +0300 @@ -1,5 +1,7 @@ I can see that getting the source isn't trivial, but bitbucket provides archives of snapshots. %{!?python_sitelib: %define python_sitelib %(%{__python} -c "from distutils.sysconfig import get_python_lib; print get_python_lib()")} +%define snapshot 9db16b76dc19 + Name: django-robots Version: 0.6.1 Release: 1%{?dist} @@ -8,11 +10,12 @@ Group: Development/Languages License: BSD URL: http://bitbucket.org/jezdez/django-robots/ -Source0: %{name}-%{version}.tar.gz +Source0: http://bitbucket.org/jezdez/%{name}/get/%{snapshot}.gz BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) The package wouldn't build in mock without setuptools: BuildArch: noarch BuildRequires: python-devel +BuildRequires: python-setuptools-devel Requires: Django %description @@ -20,7 +23,7 @@ robots exclusion protocol, complementing the Django Sitemap contrib app. %prep -%setup -q -n %{name}-%{version} +%setup -q -n %{name} %build %{__python} setup.py build Finally, I think the %files section would be better like this: @@ -35,10 +38,9 @@ %files %defattr(-,root,root,-) -%doc README.rst -%doc INSTALL.txt -%doc docs/overview.txt -%{python_sitelib}/* +%doc README.rst INSTALL.txt docs/* +%{python_sitelib}/robots/* +%{python_sitelib}/django_robots-%{version}-py2.6.egg-info %changelog * Fri Aug 21 2009 Luca Botti <lucabotti> I also found the following rpmlint errors which should be easy to fix: django-robots.noarch: W: no-version-in-last-changelog django-robots.noarch: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/robots/locale/de/LC_MESSAGES/django.mo django-robots.noarch: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/robots/locale/fr/LC_MESSAGES/django.mo 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. Good luck!
Have you been sponsored, yet? If so please provide a new package with the suggested fixes and I'll do the review. Even if you are not sponsored, yet, we can make this depend on #518636 and I can approve once you're sponsored (and the package is fine...).
Here comes the spec file: http://lucabotti.fedorapeople.org/packages/django-robots.spec and here is the package: http://lucabotti.fedorapeople.org/packages/django-robots-0.6.1-2.fc11.src.rpm Thanks and regards
> $ rpmbuild -bp django-robots.spec error: File > /home/mapleoin/rpmbuild/SOURCES/django-robots-9db16b76dc19.gz: No such file > or directory Source0: http://bitbucket.org/jezdez/%{Name}/get/%{name}-%{snapshot}.gz should be: Source0: http://bitbucket.org/jezdez/%{name}/get/%{snapshot}.gz > %{python_sitelib}/robots/* Chek out: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:UnownedDirectories#Common_Mistakes You should use find_lang to include locales, instead of specifying them in the files section: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Why_do_we_need_to_use_.25find_lang.3F You have to include the LICENSE.txt file in your package. Changelogs should be a bit more informative. Try to describe what exactly has changed within the SPEC file, not just that it's been "fixed".
Luca, any progress on this?
Hi, after some time, I uploaded updated versions of package and spec file. You can find them at: http://lucabotti.fedorapeople.org/packages/django-robots.spec and http://lucabotti.fedorapeople.org/packages/django-robots-0.6.1-3.fc12.src.rpm Ready for review. best regards
Sadly, I'm unable to give you an official review. If you like, I'd give you some inofficial comments rpmlint django-robots-0.6.1-3.fc12.src.rpm django-robots.spec django-robots.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) txt -> text, ext, tit django-robots.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US txt -> text, ext, tit django-robots.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Sitemap -> Site map, Site-map, Sideman django-robots.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US contrib -> cont rib, cont-rib, contribute django-robots.src: W: invalid-url Source0: http://bitbucket.org/jezdez/%{Name}/get/django-robots-0.6.1.tar.gz HTTP Error 400: Bad Request django-robots.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: http://bitbucket.org/jezdez/%{Name}/get/django-robots-0.6.1.tar.gz HTTP Error 400: Bad Request 1 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings. * %define version vs. Version: ? * %{Name} should be %{name} (lower case) in Source0. * BuildRequires should require python-setuptools, not python-setuptools-devel * Build produces warning: warning: File listed twice: /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/robots/locale/de/LC_MESSAGES/django.mo warning: File listed twice: /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/robots/locale/fr/LC_MESSAGES/django.mo * Package Name is ok, spec-file named according to package name. * License seems to be a kind of propriary license. Listed in SPEC is BSD, LICENSE.txt * LICENSE etc goes to %doc (ok) * SPEC file is legible and in plain american english (good) * find_lang is unused in favor of own script. (ok / not ok ?)
(In reply to comment #8) > Sadly, I'm unable to give you an official review. If you like, I'd give you > some inofficial comments > * %define version vs. Version: ? The "%define version" needs to go away. > * License seems to be a kind of propriary license. Listed in SPEC is BSD, > LICENSE.txt I did not look at the LICENSE.txt, but there are a lot of variations of the BSD license, maybe it matches one of these: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/BSD > * find_lang is unused in favor of own script. (ok / not ok ?) This seems to be ok, because find_lang only searches in /usr/share/locale. But on the other hand, maybe the files should be installed in /usr/share/locale instead.
(In reply to comment #9) > I did not look at the LICENSE.txt, but there are a lot of variations of the BSD > license, maybe it matches one of these: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/BSD IMHO LICENSE.txt should be ok, then.
About the License: it's a BSD license confirmed by the author About the translations: like other Django related stuff (and Django itself) the languages shall go under /usr/lib/python${ver}/site-packages/${package_name}/locale removed version error new files: http://lucabotti.fedorapeople.org/packages/django-robots.spec http://lucabotti.fedorapeople.org/packages/django-robots-0.6.1-4.fc12.src.rpm thx and regards
(In reply to comment #11) Luca, Source0 URL should read: Source0: http://bitbucket.org/jezdez/%{name}/downloads/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
Fixed URL new file versions: http://lucabotti.fedorapeople.org/packages/django-robots.spec http://lucabotti.fedorapeople.org/packages/django-robots-0.6.1-5.fc12.src.rpm
You did not change %define to %global in the first line of the spec. Btw. did you perform some unofficial reviews, too?
Hey Luca, are you still interested in joining the Fedora package maintainers? My last comment is more than four months old and has not been answered by you. If you are not interested anymore or are just lacking the time currently, please let us know.
Ping Luca. Anything new? are you still interested? I'll close this request, if we don't hear from you within the next 14 days.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 696516 ***