Bug 658450 - Review Request: ATpy - Astronomical Tables in Python
Summary: Review Request: ATpy - Astronomical Tables in Python
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Golo Fuchert
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
Depends On:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2010-11-30 12:08 UTC by Sergio Pascual
Modified: 2011-05-10 23:24 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2011-05-10 23:24:13 UTC
Type: ---
packages: fedora-review+
j: fedora-cvs+

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Sergio Pascual 2010-11-30 12:08:28 UTC
Spec URL: http://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/ATpy.spec
SRPM URL: http://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/ATpy-0.9.4-1.fc14.src.rpm
ATpy is a high-level Python package providing a way to manipulate tables of 
astronomical data in a uniform way. It provides built-in support for NumPy
recarrays and common astronomical file/database formats (FITS, VO, HDF5, 
and ASCII tables) with a very simple API.

Comment 1 Golo Fuchert 2011-04-25 20:06:41 UTC

it seems that the license information in the SPEC file is not correct any more.
Beside of that, I would strongly suggest you to be a little bit more precise in the %files section. Who knows what they will ship in that tarball tomorrow?

Beside of that the package seems to be ready for a review.

Comment 2 Sergio Pascual 2011-04-26 12:06:13 UTC

the license in the SPEC comes from the tarball. I know the license in git is MIT, but the tarball is not a git checkout. As soon as upstream make a new release, I will update the licensing information.

Now the %files section is more verbose.

Spec URL: http://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/ATpy.spec
SRPM URL: http://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/ATpy-0.9.4-2.fc14.src.rpm

Comment 3 Sergio Pascual 2011-04-26 19:48:01 UTC
With python3 support

Spec URL: http://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/ATpy.spec
SRPM URL: http://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/ATpy-0.9.4-3.fc14.src.rpm

Comment 4 Golo Fuchert 2011-04-27 20:06:21 UTC
I see. And you chose GPL+ because of [1], right?:

"A GPL or LGPL licensed package that lacks any statement of what version that it's licensed under in the source code/program output/accompanying docs is technically licensed under *any* version of the GPL or LGPL, not just the version in whatever COPYING file they include."

This should be right. However, the comment in the spec file might be a bit misleading then.

[1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing

Comment 5 Sergio Pascual 2011-04-27 20:58:21 UTC
(In reply to comment #4)
> I see. And you chose GPL+ because of [1], right?:


> This should be right. However, the comment in the spec file might be a bit
> misleading then.

I agree with that. I can change the comment to "Next release will be under MIT license"

Comment 6 Sergio Pascual 2011-05-02 14:35:25 UTC
New upstream release, under MIT license

Spec URL: http://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/ATpy.spec
SRPM URL: http://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/ATpy-0.9.5-1.fc16.src.rpm

Comment 7 Golo Fuchert 2011-05-07 17:35:32 UTC
This is the official review:


[+] = ok
[o] = does not apply
[-] = needs work


[+] rpmlint is quiet enough (false positive):

rpmlint SPECS/ATpy.spec SRPMS/ATpy-0.9.5-1.fc14.src.rpm RPMS/noarch/ATpy-0.9.5-1.fc14.noarch.rpm 
ATpy.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US recarrays -> rec arrays, rec-arrays, recalibrate
ATpy.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US recarrays -> rec arrays, rec-arrays, recalibrate
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

[+] The package is named according to the guidelines
[+] Spec file name matches base package name
[+] The package follows the Packaging Guidelines
[+] The license is an approved licence (MIT)
[+] The License field matches the actual licence
[+] License file from source file is included in %doc
[+] The spec file is written in American English
[+] The spec file is legible
[+] Packaged sources match with upstream sources (md5)

md5sum ATpy-0.9.5.tar.gz.packaged ATpy-0.9.5.tar.gz.upstream 
9e030de0f6ed9f59aed3f03010af4012  ATpy-0.9.5.tar.gz.packaged
9e030de0f6ed9f59aed3f03010af4012  ATpy-0.9.5.tar.gz.upstream

[+] Package build at least on one primary architecture
[+] ExecludeArch is not known to be needed.
[+] All build dependencies are listed in the BuildRequires section
[o] No locales for the package
[o] Package does not store shared libraries
[+] Package does not bundle copies of system libraries
[o] Package is not relocatable
[+] Package owns all directories it installs.
[+] No files are listed more than once in the %files section
[+] File permissions are set properly (%defattr(...) is used)
[+] Consistent use of macros
[+] Package contains code and documentation only, no content
[+] No large documentation files
[+] %doc files do not affect runtime
[o] No header files included
[o] No static libraries included
[o] library files ending with .so included in devel subpackage
[o] no -devel subpackage
[+] No libtool .la archives included
[o] No GUI application, no need for a .desktop file
[+] Package does not own files or directories that are owned by other packages
[+] All filenames are valid UTF-8

python specific items:

[+] Python eggs are be built from source.
[+] Python eggs do not download any dependencies during the build process.
[o] Not building a compat package.
[o] Not building multiple versions (except python3 version). 

SHOULD items:

[o] Source package does already include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream
[o] No other Non-English languages supported
[+] The package builds in mock
[o] No koji scratch build because of conditional build macros
[o] No "runable" program packaged to test
[+] No "exotic" scriptlets used
[o] Pyhton3 subpackage does not need to require the base package
[o] no pkgconfig(.pc) files included
[o] No file dependencies
[o] No binaries/scripts -> no man pages needed


No further comments, everything seems to be fine.




Comment 8 Sergio Pascual 2011-05-07 23:11:46 UTC
New Package SCM Request
Package Name: ATpy
Short Description: Astronomical Tables in Python
Owners: sergiopr
Branches: f13 f14 f15 el6 el5

Comment 9 Jason Tibbitts 2011-05-10 15:13:15 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

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