[Bug 1019948] Review Request: python-astroML - Python tools for machine learning and data mining in Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019948 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||python-astroML-0.2-2.fc20 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2014-03-26 01:34:16 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- python-astroML-0.2-2.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: 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 1019948] Review Request: python-astroML - Python tools for machine learning and data mining in Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019948 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- python-astroML-0.2-2.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 testing repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: 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 1019948] Review Request: python-astroML - Python tools for machine learning and data mining in Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019948 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- python-astroML-0.2-2.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-astroML-0.2-2.fc20 -- You are receiving this mail because: 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 1019948] Review Request: python-astroML - Python tools for machine learning and data mining in Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019948 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: 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 1019948] Review Request: python-astroML - Python tools for machine learning and data mining in Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019948 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: 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 1019948] Review Request: python-astroML - Python tools for machine learning and data mining in Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019948 --- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: 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 1019948] Review Request: python-astroML - Python tools for machine learning and data mining in Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019948 Björn "besser82" Esser changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1077268 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1077268 [Bug 1077268] Review Request: python-astroML-addons - Performance add-ons for the astroML package -- You are receiving this mail because: 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 1019948] Review Request: python-astroML - Python tools for machine learning and data mining in Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019948 Christian Dersch changed: What|Removed |Added CC|package-review@lists.fedora | |project.org | Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Christian Dersch --- Thanks for reviewing :) # New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-astroML Short Description: Python tools for machine learning and data mining in Astronomy Owners: lupinix Branches: f20 InitialCC: ml-sig -- 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 1019948] Review Request: python-astroML - Python tools for machine learning and data mining in Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019948 Björn "besser82" Esser changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|POST Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR),| |100 (ML-SIG)| Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #7 from Björn "besser82" Esser --- LGTM, now. :D = Solution = Package APPROVED!!! # You can go on with "SCM Admin Request", now. If you need some assitance, you know how to get in touch with me. :D Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=100 [Bug 100] Machine Learning SIG - review tracker -- 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 1019948] Review Request: python-astroML - Python tools for machine learning and data mining in Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019948 --- Comment #6 from Christian Dersch --- Thank you for reviewing :) Pushed fixed spec/srpm Spec URL: http://lupinix.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-astroML/python-astroML.spec SRPM URL: http://lupinix.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-astroML/python-astroML-0.2-2.fc20.src.rpm Greetings, Christian -- 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 1019948] Review Request: python-astroML - Python tools for machine learning and data mining in Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019948
--- Comment #5 from Björn "besser82" Esser ---
Created attachment 875488
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=875488&action=edit
improved spec-file
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass
[!] = Fail
[-] = Not applicable
= MUST items =
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:
"Unknown or generated". 306 files have unknown license. Detailed output
of licensecheck in /home/besser82/shared/fedora/review/1019948-python-
astroML/licensecheck.txt
---> license-tag is fine. :)
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[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.
[-]: 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.
[!]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
---> see comments below.
[x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[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 3 files.
[!]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
---> issues are present.
[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
[!]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
---> please remove that, unless you want to build for el5...
[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.
[x]: 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 SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in python-
astroML-doc
---> false positive. doc-pkg is fine to install without that deps.
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[x]: %che
[Bug 1019948] Review Request: python-astroML - Python tools for machine learning and data mining in Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019948 --- Comment #4 from Christian Dersch --- Created package with new version 0.2 Spec URL: http://lupinix.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-astroML/python-astroML.spec SRPM URL: http://lupinix.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-astroML/python-astroML-0.2-1.fc20.src.rpm The "addons"-Package is now a seperate package since upstream splitted the source into two projects. Greetings, Christian -- 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 1019948] Review Request: python-astroML - Python tools for machine learning and data mining in Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019948 --- Comment #3 from Christian Dersch --- Thank you very much, Björn! Created new spec and source rpm to fix the issues: Spec URL: http://lupinix.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-astroML/v2/python-astroML.spec SRPM URL: http://lupinix.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-astroML/v2/python-astroml-0.1.2-2.fc19.src.rpm Greetings, Christian -- 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 1019948] Review Request: python-astroML - Python tools for machine learning and data mining in Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019948
--- Comment #2 from Björn "besser82" Esser ---
NOTE: Running this review on Fedora 20, because in rawhide are (still) broken
dependencies from the ATLAS-update:
Getting requirements for python-astroML-0.1.2-1.fc21.src
--> python-devel-2.7.5-8.fc21.x86_64
--> 1:numpy-1.8.0-0.5.b2.fc21.x86_64
--> scipy-0.13.0-0.3.b1.fc21.x86_64
--> python-scikit-learn-0.14.1-3.fc21.x86_64
--> pyfits-3.1.2-2.fc20.x86_64
--> python-matplotlib-1.3.0-1.fc20.x86_64
Error: Package: python-scikit-learn-0.14.1-3.fc21.x86_64 (fedora)
Requires: libatlas.so.3()(64bit)
Error: Package: python-scikit-learn-0.14.1-3.fc21.x86_64 (fedora)
Requires: libptf77blas.so.3()(64bit)
Error: Package: python-scikit-learn-0.14.1-3.fc21.x86_64 (fedora)
Requires: libptcblas.so.3()(64bit)
You could try using --skip-broken to work around the problem
You could try running: rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest
Child return code was: 1
#
Package has some issues :(
#
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass
[!] = Fail
[-] = Not applicable
[?] = Not evaluated
Issues:
===
- Permissions on files are set properly.
Note: See rpmlint output
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#FilePermissions
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[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.
---> This is intentional on c-compiled python-plugins.
[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:
"Unknown or generated". 306 files have unknown license. Detailed output
of licensecheck in /home/besser82/shared/fedora/review/1019948-python-
astroML/licensecheck.txt
---> License-tag is fine.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
Note: No known owner of /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/astroML,
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astroML_addons
---> You can solve this issue quite easily by changing this
inside the spec-file:
%files
%doc CHANGES.rst LICENSE.rst README.rst
-# For arch-specific packages: sitearch
-%{python_sitelib}/astroML/*
+%{python_sitelib}/astroML
%{python_sitelib}/astroML-%{version}-py2.7.egg-info
%files addons
-%doc CHANGES.rst LICENSE.rst README.rst
-# For arch-specific packages: sitearch
-%{python_sitearch}/astroML_addons/*
+%{python_sitearch}/astroML_addons
%{python_sitearch}/astroML_addons-%{version}-py2.7.egg-info
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python2.7/site-
packages/astroML, /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/astroML_addons
---> as said above
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
---> You can remove `CFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS"` safely, because this
gets pick-up by python-setuptools automatically.
[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.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[!]: 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.
[!]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 40960 bytes in 6 files.
---> having `%doc CHANGES.rst LICENSE.rst README.rst` in the main-pkg
is enough. there's no reason for duplicating this into the
addon-subpkg.
[Bug 1019948] Review Request: python-astroML - Python tools for machine learning and data mining in Astronomy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019948 Björn "besser82" Esser changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||bjoern.es...@gmail.com Blocks||177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR), ||100 (ML-SIG) Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|bjoern.es...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Björn "besser82" Esser --- taken ;) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=100 [Bug 100] Machine Learning SIG - review tracker -- 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
