[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 --- Comment #42 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- Oh! I just remembered that doxygen has multilib issue, you should patch the package like: -HTML_TIMESTAMP = YES +HTML_TIMESTAMP = NO -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #40 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-astropy Short Description: A Community Python Library for Astronomy Owners: sergiopr Branches: f20 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 --- Comment #41 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2014-01-16 11:35:10 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 --- Comment #38 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com --- The build in koji was successful. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #39 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- PACKAGE APPROVED. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 --- Comment #34 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- Weird again, your scratch build failed as well: BuildError: mismatch when analyzing python-astropy-doc-0.3-3.fc21.noarch.rpm, rpmdiff output was: added /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/graphviz-5082295f8098ba43ec9d823e2a0d24078537955b.png added /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/graphviz-5082295f8098ba43ec9d823e2a0d24078537955b.png.map removed /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/graphviz-9bb7d119428221cde6b76c3ff84432babc499a6c.png removed /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/graphviz-9bb7d119428221cde6b76c3ff84432babc499a6c.png.map added /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-0084c811e6487b71b6df8fb369cf8ddfcb4cb6a9.png added /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-0084c811e6487b71b6df8fb369cf8ddfcb4cb6a9.png.map removed /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-0560420ad5aff03ce0abb516572c45f8ba82c913.png removed /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-0560420ad5aff03ce0abb516572c45f8ba82c913.png.map added /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-0d5e58335e132bb9d517d8c6001d32cf666ad93b.png added /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-0d5e58335e132bb9d517d8c6001d32cf666ad93b.png.map added /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-0f4093d8e567c793590a52a9085e4a13899184bc.png added /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-0f4093d8e567c793590a52a9085e4a13899184bc.png.map removed /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-15ff260df4931cec319a37d6d17e23b220d94b8e.png removed /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-15ff260df4931cec319a37d6d17e23b220d94b8e.png.map added /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-21e6abfeb9295d21d9c2fe31ce25c41aa5a1f7c0.png added /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-21e6abfeb9295d21d9c2fe31ce25c41aa5a1f7c0.png.map added /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-2e52132ebc4b8b8348d0fe93e144285d686faa8e.png added /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-2e52132ebc4b8b8348d0fe93e144285d686faa8e.png.map added /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-30f5ce0cf181ed435ef0a2d86c4d56e72526fb92.png added /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-30f5ce0cf181ed435ef0a2d86c4d56e72526fb92.png.map removed /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-3d3097cbca3b1a9b62f8d863e62a775ed6b308ce.png removed /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-3d3097cbca3b1a9b62f8d863e62a775ed6b308ce.png.map added /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-4118f4a97736287ce007efc489c5b64063979199.png added /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-4118f4a97736287ce007efc489c5b64063979199.png.map removed /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-577c19aad8073659e085f8a395b068aeb7009b1d.png removed /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-577c19aad8073659e085f8a395b068aeb7009b1d.png.map removed /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-602d4524d4592bf55f4ec48552813436c5497ac5.png removed /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-602d4524d4592bf55f4ec48552813436c5497ac5.png.map removed /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-6567d2e29a3dd24f0b1de3f780a2f089eff36d4d.png removed /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-6567d2e29a3dd24f0b1de3f780a2f089eff36d4d.png.map added /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-65f549c7ebb64a98a8fd9faaad20f479035aec94.png added /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-65f549c7ebb64a98a8fd9faaad20f479035aec94.png.map added /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-6911b52053a40e2b65530cd386903c509a2ba95c.png added /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-6911b52053a40e2b65530cd386903c509a2ba95c.png.map added /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-73d79dbe92a82ba9eb62f31912ee708b5611e0f0.png added /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-73d79dbe92a82ba9eb62f31912ee708b5611e0f0.png.map added /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-79f62001f20cc7ad784af292d4cb7f76f77c7af3.png added /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-79f62001f20cc7ad784af292d4cb7f76f77c7af3.png.map added /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-79f9455dbc78767234194b697fd9489af6455b47.png added /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/inheritance-79f9455dbc78767234194b697fd9489af6455b47.png.map removed
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738
--- Comment #33 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to Christopher Meng from comment #32)
1. Please use %{__python2}/%{python2_sitearch} macro.
2. for i in %{buildroot}/usr/bin/*; do
sed -i '1s|^#!/usr/bin/python3|#!/usr/bin/python|' $i
done
-- Patch it to %{__python2}.
Done
3. Local build successfully, but failed at Koji:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6383060
This is a problem with wcslib 4.20.
I updated it a few days ago in Rawhide from wcslib 4.19. The output of one test
is slightly different in both versions. I have reported the problem to astropy
upstream. They will know if it is a problem with wcslib or with astropy
https://github.com/astropy/astropy/issues/1955
In the mean time, I have patched the code so that the problematic test passes.
Spec URL: http://guaix.fis.ucm.es/~spr/fedora/python-astropy.spec
SRPM URL: http://guaix.fis.ucm.es/~spr/fedora/python-astropy-0.3-3.fc20.src.rpm
Koji build in Rawhide
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6384105
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 --- Comment #35 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com --- Ups, sorry, I missed the fail, I only saw the green status of the builds. Let me see... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 --- Comment #36 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com --- So the problem is that -doc are noarch packages but there are files whose name is a hash generated perhaps with the date, such as /usr/share/doc/python-astropy-doc/html/_images/graphviz-aeb253d26866d13006a0901b5b5003218c954eea.png and the name is different depending on the build (i686, x86_64, etc) For the moment I'm going to convert the doc subpackages to arched ones, unless we find a better solution Spec URL: http://guaix.fis.ucm.es/~spr/fedora/python-astropy.spec SRPM URL: http://guaix.fis.ucm.es/~spr/fedora/python-astropy-0.3-4.fc20.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 --- Comment #37 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com --- Ongoing koji build http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6384917 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 --- Comment #29 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com --- It may be due to h5py not being rebuilt -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 --- Comment #30 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com --- I have disabled the HDF version check. The checks still pass Spec URL: http://guaix.fis.ucm.es/~spr/fedora/python-astropy.spec SRPM URL: http://guaix.fis.ucm.es/~spr/fedora/python-astropy-0.3-2.fc19.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 --- Comment #31 from Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com --- h5py-2.2.1-2.fc21 has been rebuilt with hdf5 1.8.12 and should fix that issue. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 --- Comment #28 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- Failed at %check: http://ur1.ca/gc45y Caused by new hdf5 version in Rawhide. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 --- Comment #27 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- rawhide python-pillow is ill, please wait. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 --- Comment #26 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- I will use 0.5.1 to generate a report again soon. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 --- Comment #25 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com --- Any progress with this? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||cicku...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|cicku...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW Assignee|bjoern.es...@gmail.com |nob...@fedoraproject.org Flags|fedora-review? | --- Comment #24 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com --- After a week with no comments from the reviewer, I'm going to reset the review as per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(bjoern.esser@gmai | |l.com) | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738
--- Comment #23 from Christian Dersch chrisder...@gmail.com ---
Hi,
I performed another (right now informal) review, looks fine imho :) As I'm new
to reviewing
packages, I'm unsure about some points (marked with [?] = not evaluated).
Greetings,
Christian
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[?]: Provides: bundled(gnulib) in place as required.
Note: Sources not installed
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[-]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
BSD (3 clause), BSD (2 clause), Unknown or generated. 425 files
have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/rpmbuild/1014738-python-astropy/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 6 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s)
for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm 4.4
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process.
[-]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 --- Comment #22 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com --- As there are no comments from the reviewer in the last month, I'm starting the stalled review process https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 --- Comment #20 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com --- New upstream, astropy 0.3 final Spec URL: http://guaix.fis.ucm.es/~spr/fedora/python-astropy.spec SRPM URL: http://guaix.fis.ucm.es/~spr/fedora/python-astropy-0.3-1.fc20.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(bjoern.esser@gmai ||l.com) --- Comment #21 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com --- I wolud like to have this reviewed before F20 is released. Is it possible? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 --- Comment #19 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com --- New upstream, this is the first release candidate of 0.3 Spec URL: http://guaix.fis.ucm.es/~spr/fedora/python-astropy.spec SRPM URL: http://guaix.fis.ucm.es/~spr/fedora/python-astropy-0.3-0.3.rc1.fc20.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738
--- Comment #18 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to Michael Schwendt from comment #16)
* How are the two -devel package supposed to work?
I honestly do not know so I have asked upstream. astropy should provide
something like 'numpy.get_include' to be able to get the headers but I can't
find it in the source code.
I can remove the -devel packages and do as numpy does, with all the devel files
in the main package, but I would like to know the reviewer's opinion.
Strangely enough, numpy package provides a symlink from /usr/include/numpy to
$libdir/python2.7/site-packages/numpy/core/include/numpy
I don't know how this linking plays well with different architectures (having
both numpy.i686 and numpy.x86_64) or stacks (python2-numpy and python3-numpy)
%exclude %{_bindir}/fitsdiff
%exclude %{_bindir}/fitscheck
Why are they excluded?
As Christian said, these are in pyfits also. astropy is meant to replace
pyfits, but it is not a drop in replacement. I do not want to start playing
with Conflicts at this point si I exclude them.
-rwxr-xr-x /usr/bin/volint
-rwxr-xr-x /usr/bin/wcslint
These are included in both the Python package and the Python 3 based
package. But in python-astropy, the files contain a /usr/bin/python3
shebang. - blocker!
And with a corrected shebang, the packages would conflict. - blocker!
$ rpm -qpR python-astropy-0.3-0.1.b1.fc21.x86_64.rpm |grep bin
/usr/bin/python3
/usr/bin/xmllint
Yes, I overlooked this. It seems that 'install_scripts' in setup.py overwrites
the shebang if you install the same script from different stacks. Python3
always wins in this case. It should be fixed now.
I have added a new subpackage astropy-tools with the scripts. I will allow to
ease the tranasition from python2 to python3 and from pyfits to astropy.
Spec URL: http://guaix.fis.ucm.es/~spr/python-astropy.spec
SRPM URL: http://guaix.fis.ucm.es/~spr/python-astropy-0.3-0.2.b1.fc20.src.rpm
BTW, this builds in rawhide but not in F20, as python3-configobj hasn't been
pushed to stable yet due to the Beta freeze.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 --- Comment #14 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com --- New upstream source Spec URL: http://guaix.fis.ucm.es/~spr/python-astropy.spec SRPM URL: http://guaix.fis.ucm.es/~spr/python-astropy-0.3-0.1.b1.fc20.src.rpm This is the first beta of astropy 0.3. It will be released soon (next week probably) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738
--- Comment #15 from Christian Dersch chrisder...@gmail.com ---
Hi,
looks nice :) Output from fedora-review looks fine too:
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[ ]: Provides: bundled(gnulib) in place as required.
Note: Sources not installed
[ ]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[ ]: Package contains no static executables.
[ ]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[ ]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[ ]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
BSD (3 clause), BSD (2 clause), Unknown or generated. 425 files
have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/christian/1014738-python-astropy/licensecheck.txt
[ ]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[ ]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[ ]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[ ]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[ ]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[ ]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[ ]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[ ]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[ ]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names).
[ ]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[ ]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[ ]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[ ]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[ ]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[ ]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[ ]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[ ]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[ ]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[ ]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 6 files.
[ ]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s)
for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm 4.4
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
Python:
[ ]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process.
[ ]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[ ]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[ ]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[ ]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[ ]: Fully versioned dependency in
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738
--- Comment #16 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net ---
* Please don't dump _unedited_ fedora-review output into review tickets. You
are supposed to complete all empty '[ ]' tests in the output, and trimming the
output to items that are '[!]' would be very helpful.
* How are the two -devel package supposed to work? They contain exactly the
same headers, but only in different paths. The headers are stored below Python
search path for modules. What mechanism will be used in the C code to determine
that path? And since there are only headers, how does it work? Is there any
example that uses these headers already? Or will it be sufficient to include
the headers in the base package?
%exclude %{_bindir}/fitsdiff
%exclude %{_bindir}/fitscheck
Why are they excluded?
-rwxr-xr-x /usr/bin/volint
-rwxr-xr-x /usr/bin/wcslint
These are included in both the Python package and the Python 3 based package.
But in python-astropy, the files contain a /usr/bin/python3 shebang. -
blocker!
And with a corrected shebang, the packages would conflict. - blocker!
$ rpm -qpR python-astropy-0.3-0.1.b1.fc21.x86_64.rpm |grep bin
/usr/bin/python3
/usr/bin/xmllint
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738
--- Comment #17 from Christian Dersch chrisder...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to Michael Schwendt from comment #16)
* Please don't dump _unedited_ fedora-review output into review tickets. You
are supposed to complete all empty '[ ]' tests in the output, and trimming
the output to items that are '[!]' would be very helpful.
Sorry, these are my very first informal reviews :) I edited the output, but
just by adding comments such as = Should be false positive
%exclude %{_bindir}/fitsdiff
%exclude %{_bindir}/fitscheck
Why are they excluded?
These files are also part of the pyfits package. Would be a conflict then.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 --- Comment #13 from Christian Dersch chrisder...@gmail.com --- I'm performing one more informal review: Package Review == Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed = MUST items = C/C++: [ ]: Provides: bundled(gnulib) in place as required. Note: Sources not installed [ ]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [ ]: Package contains no static executables. [ ]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see attachment). Verify they are not in ld path. [x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. Generic: [ ]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [ ]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: BSD (3 clause), BSD (2 clause), Unknown or generated. 331 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/rpmbuild/1014738-python-astropy/licensecheck.txt [ ]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [ ]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/units(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/io/fits/scripts(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/wcs/tests(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/extern/ply(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/utils(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/io/votable(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/io/ascii/tests(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/io/fits/tests/data(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/io/fits(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/sphinx/ext(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/io/misc/tests(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/table/tests(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/wcs(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/cosmology(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/nddata(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/coordinates(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/sphinx/ext/templates/autosummary_core(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/io/tests(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/io/fits/hdu(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/sphinx(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/io(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/utils/tests(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/constants(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/io/ascii/tests/t/vizier(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7 /site-packages/astropy/sphinx/themes/bootstrap-astropy/static(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/time(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/io/misc(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/units/tests(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/wcs/tests/spectra(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/io/votable/tests/data(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7 /site-packages/astropy/config(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/units/format(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/io/ascii/tests/t/cds/multi(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/time/tests(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/sphinx/themes/bootstrap- astropy(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/io/votable/data(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/io/ascii/tests/t(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/tests/tests/data(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/io/votable/validator/urls(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7 /site-packages/astropy/utils/tests/data(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7 /site-packages/astropy/constants/tests(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7 /site-packages/astropy/extern(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/cosmology/tests(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/config/tests(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/io/ascii/tests/t/cds/glob(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7 /site-packages/astropy(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 --- Comment #12 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com --- New upstream source Spec URL: http://guaix.fis.ucm.es/~spr/python-astropy.spec SRPM URL: http://guaix.fis.ucm.es/~spr/python-astropy-0.2.5-1.fc20.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 --- Comment #10 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com --- (In reply to Sergio Pascual from comment #8) (In reply to Mario Blättermann from comment #3) Requires: /usr/bin/xmllint Why not use libxml2 instead of this hardcoded path? If you prefer, you might even use a simple xmllint. Paths can change in the future, but rpm has the capability to find xmllint anyway. I didn't know RPM could do that... RPM parses the Provides: tags of the packages. This way it will find xmllint as part of the package libxml2. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bugs.mich...@gmx.net --- Comment #11 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net --- Sounds unusual. Never have heard about that before. Or am I misreading it? # repoquery --whatprovides xmllint # Nothing provides xmllint. If the dependency is Requires: libxml2 and /usr/bin/xmllint moves to another package, you've lost. A dependency on the specific executable path is more strict and more flexible at the same time. Plus, executable paths are covered by the primary metadata. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 --- Comment #8 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com --- (In reply to Mario Blättermann from comment #3) Requires: /usr/bin/xmllint Why not use libxml2 instead of this hardcoded path? If you prefer, you might even use a simple xmllint. Paths can change in the future, but rpm has the capability to find xmllint anyway. I didn't know RPM could do that... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 --- Comment #9 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com --- Updated RPM Spec URL: http://guaix.fis.ucm.es/~spr/python-astropy.spec SRPM URL: http://guaix.fis.ucm.es/~spr/python-astropy-0.2.4-4.fc20.src.rpm * pytest in fedora = 20 breaks the tests, I have disabled the tests for those https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/astropy-dev/Otddr6bWGhQ * enabled python3 package (the docs are copied though, there's a bug in python3 sphinx https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014505) * C headers go to a -devel subpackage -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 Björn besser82 Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||bjoern.es...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|bjoern.es...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #4 from Björn besser82 Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com --- taken ;) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 --- Comment #5 from Björn besser82 Esser bjoern.es...@gmail.com --- Created attachment 814039 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=814039action=edit build.log -- FTBFS on rawhide FTBFS on rawhide!!! See attached build.log :( -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 Christian Dersch chrisder...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||chrisder...@gmail.com --- Comment #6 from Christian Dersch chrisder...@gmail.com --- I'm doing an informal review, thank you very much for packaging astropy :) It doesn't build in mock with rawhide x86_64, so I used mock with f20 x86_64 to build. Notes: - There are header files in /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/wcs/include/ which shouldn't be required at runtime. *** Output from fedora-review *** Package Review == Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: === - Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. Note: python-astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/wcs/include/astropy_wcs.h python-astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/wcs/include/astropy_wcs_api.h python-astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/wcs/include/distortion.h python-astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/wcs/include/distortion_wrap.h python-astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/wcs/include/docstrings.h python-astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/wcs/include/isnan.h python- astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/wcs/include/pipeline.h python-astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/wcs/include/pyutil.h python-astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7 /site-packages/astropy/wcs/include/sip.h python-astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/wcs/include/sip_wrap.h python- astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/wcs/include/str_list_proxy.h python-astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/wcs/include/unit_list_proxy.h python-astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/wcs/include/util.h python-astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7 /site-packages/astropy/wcs/include/wcsconfig.h python-astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/wcs/include/wcslib_tabprm_wrap.h python-astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/wcs/include/wcslib_units_wrap.h python-astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/wcs/include/wcslib_wrap.h python- astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/wcs/include/wcslib_wtbarr_wrap.h See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#DevelPackages = MUST items = C/C++: [ ]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [ ]: Package contains no static executables. [ ]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see attachment). Verify they are not in ld path. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. Generic: [ ]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [ ]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: BSD (3 clause), BSD (2 clause), Unknown or generated. 328 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/christian/1014738-python-astropy/licensecheck.txt [ ]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [ ]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/units(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/io/fits/scripts(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/wcs/tests(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/extern/ply(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/utils(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/io/votable(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/io/ascii/tests(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/io/fits/tests/data(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/io/fits(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/sphinx/ext(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/io/misc/tests(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/table/tests(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/wcs(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/cosmology(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/nddata(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/coordinates(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/sphinx/ext/templates/autosummary_core(astropy),
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 --- Comment #7 from Christian Dersch chrisder...@gmail.com --- I'm doing an informal review, thank you very much for packaging astropy :) It doesn't build in mock with rawhide x86_64, so I used mock with f20 x86_64 to build. Notes: - There are header files in /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/wcs/include/ which shouldn't be required at runtime. *** Output from fedora-review *** Package Review == Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: === - Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. Note: python-astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/wcs/include/astropy_wcs.h python-astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/wcs/include/astropy_wcs_api.h python-astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/wcs/include/distortion.h python-astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/wcs/include/distortion_wrap.h python-astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/wcs/include/docstrings.h python-astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/wcs/include/isnan.h python- astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/wcs/include/pipeline.h python-astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/wcs/include/pyutil.h python-astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7 /site-packages/astropy/wcs/include/sip.h python-astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/wcs/include/sip_wrap.h python- astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/wcs/include/str_list_proxy.h python-astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/wcs/include/unit_list_proxy.h python-astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/wcs/include/util.h python-astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7 /site-packages/astropy/wcs/include/wcsconfig.h python-astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/wcs/include/wcslib_tabprm_wrap.h python-astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/wcs/include/wcslib_units_wrap.h python-astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/wcs/include/wcslib_wrap.h python- astropy : /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/wcs/include/wcslib_wtbarr_wrap.h See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#DevelPackages = MUST items = C/C++: [ ]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [ ]: Package contains no static executables. [ ]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see attachment). Verify they are not in ld path. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. Generic: [ ]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [ ]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: BSD (3 clause), BSD (2 clause), Unknown or generated. 328 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/christian/1014738-python-astropy/licensecheck.txt [ ]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [ ]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/units(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/io/fits/scripts(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/wcs/tests(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/extern/ply(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/utils(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/io/votable(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/io/ascii/tests(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/io/fits/tests/data(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/io/fits(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/sphinx/ext(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/io/misc/tests(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/table/tests(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/wcs(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/cosmology(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/nddata(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/coordinates(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/astropy/sphinx/ext/templates/autosummary_core(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/io/tests(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/io/fits/hdu(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/sphinx(astropy), /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astropy/io(astropy),
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mario.blaetterm...@gmail.co ||m --- Comment #3 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com --- Requires: /usr/bin/xmllint Why not use libxml2 instead of this hardcoded path? If you prefer, you might even use a simple xmllint. Paths can change in the future, but rpm has the capability to find xmllint anyway. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 --- Comment #2 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com --- Spec URL: http://guaix.fis.ucm.es/~spr/python-astropy.spec SRPM URL: http://guaix.fis.ucm.es/~spr/python-astropy-0.2.4-2.fc19.src.rpm The bundled cfistio library in f20+ has been removed. It uses now system libraries. When python3-configobject reaches stable I will enable de python3 package -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014738] Review Request: python-astropy - A Community Python Library for Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014738 --- Comment #1 from Sergio Pascual sergio.pa...@gmail.com --- Some comments astropy-0.2.4 comes with SOFA[1], a non free library by the IAU. It has been substituted by ERFA[2] in the development repository and I have backported the changes to this version, so it uses ERFA instead. It has other bundled libraries, I have removed them except cfitsio for f20+.[3], where the version of cfitsio is incompatible with astropy. The python3 subpackage is possible, but it's broken due to some bugs [4], [5] [1] http://www.iausofa.org/ [2] https://github.com/liberfa/erfa [3] https://github.com/astropy/astropy/issues/1504 [4] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014665 [5] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014505 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=nc49n7d3h7a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
