[Bug 673637] Review Request: python-carrot - AMQP Messaging Framework for Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=673637 Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fab...@bernewireless.net --- Comment #5 from Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com 2011-05-11 02:43:26 EDT --- *** Bug 611054 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 673637] Review Request: python-carrot - AMQP Messaging Framework for Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=673637 --- Comment #3 from Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us 2011-01-30 19:07:43 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 673637] Review Request: python-carrot - AMQP Messaging Framework for Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=673637 Brian Pepple bdpep...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2011-01-30 19:46:14 --- Comment #4 from Brian Pepple bdpep...@gmail.com 2011-01-30 19:46:14 EST --- Package imported and built for devel f14. Will import to el6 once a el6 version of python-amqplib is built. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 673637] Review Request: python-carrot - AMQP Messaging Framework for Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=673637 David Nalley da...@gnsa.us changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 673637] Review Request: python-carrot - AMQP Messaging Framework for Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=673637
David Nalley da...@gnsa.us changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from David Nalley da...@gnsa.us 2011-01-29 10:56:05 EST ---
OK: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the
review.
[ke4qqq@L1012001 rpmbuild]$ rpmlint SRPMS/python-carrot-0.10.7-2.fc14.src.rpm
SPECS/python-carrot.spec RPMS/noarch/python-carrot-0.10.7-2.fc14.noarch.rpm
python-carrot.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency python-amqplib
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings.
I agree that can be disregarded.
OK: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .
OK: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
OK: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines
OK: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines .
OK: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
OK: 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 must be included in %doc.
OK: The spec file must be written in American English.
OK: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
OK: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no
upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.
[ke4qqq@L1012001 SOURCES]$ md5sum carrot-0.10.7.tar.gz*
530a0614de3a669314c3acd4995c54d5 carrot-0.10.7.tar.gz
530a0614de3a669314c3acd4995c54d5 carrot-0.10.7.tar.gz.1
OK: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
NA: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line.
OK: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ; inclusion of
those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
NA: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
NA: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library files
(not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call
ldconfig in %post and %postun.
OK: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
NA: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this
fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for relocation
of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is considered a
blocker.
OK: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create a
directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does create that
directory.
OK: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings.
OK: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with
executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a
%defattr(...) line.
OK: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
OK: Each package must consistently use macros.
OK: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
NA: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The definition of
large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not restricted to
size. Large can refer to either size or quantity).
OK: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of
the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run properly
if it is not present.
NA: Header files must be in a -devel package.
NA: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
NA: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig' (for
directory ownership and usability).
NA: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1),
then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel
package.
NA: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package
using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
NA: Packages must NOT contain any .la
[Bug 673637] Review Request: python-carrot - AMQP Messaging Framework for Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=673637 Brian Pepple bdpep...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Brian Pepple bdpep...@gmail.com 2011-01-29 12:00:36 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-carrot Short Description: AMQP Messaging Framework for Python Owners: bpepple Branches: f14 el6 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 673637] Review Request: python-carrot - AMQP Messaging Framework for Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=673637 Brian Pepple bdpep...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Alias||python-carrot -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 673637] Review Request: python-carrot - AMQP Messaging Framework for Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=673637 Brian Pepple bdpep...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||611277(python-celery), ||649495(openstack-nova) AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|da...@gnsa.us -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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
