[Bug 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=675588 --- Comment #18 from Thomas Moschny thomas.mosc...@gmx.de --- (In reply to Orion Poplawski from comment #17) Thomas - would you be willing to maintain pycmd in EPEL7? Sure, will have a look. -- 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 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=675588 --- Comment #20 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- 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 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=675588 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 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 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=675588 Thomas Moschny thomas.mosc...@gmx.de changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #19 from Thomas Moschny thomas.mosc...@gmx.de --- Package Change Request == Package Name: pycmd New Branches: epel7 Owners: thm -- 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 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=675588 Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||or...@cora.nwra.com --- Comment #17 from Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com --- Thomas - would you be willing to maintain pycmd in EPEL7? -- 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 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files
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=675588 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-08-22 11:19:02 EDT --- pytest-2.1.0-2.fc16, pycmd-1.0-3.fc16, python-py-1.4.4-2.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. -- 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 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files
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=675588 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||pytest-2.1.0-2.fc16 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2011-08-22 11:19:15 -- 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 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files
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=675588 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- 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 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files
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=675588 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-08-11 08:59:04 EDT --- pytest-2.1.0-2.fc16,pycmd-1.0-3.fc16,python-py-1.4.4-2.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pytest-2.1.0-2.fc16,pycmd-1.0-3.fc16,python-py-1.4.4-2.fc16 -- 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 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files
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=675588 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-08-12 00:21:30 EDT --- pytest-2.1.0-2.fc16, pycmd-1.0-3.fc16, python-py-1.4.4-2.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 testing repository. -- 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 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files
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=675588 Pierre-YvesChibon pin...@pingoured.fr changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|pin...@pingoured.fr 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 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files
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=675588
Pierre-YvesChibon pin...@pingoured.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review?, |fedora-review+
|needinfo?(nobody@fedoraproj |
|ect.org)|
--- Comment #11 from Pierre-YvesChibon pin...@pingoured.fr 2011-08-10
10:57:18 EDT ---
[X] rpmlint must be run on every package.
pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.svnwcrevert-2.7
pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.countloc
pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.lookup-2.7
pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.convert_unittest-2.7
pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.lookup
pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.countloc-2.7
pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.which
pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.cleanup-2.7
pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.which-2.7
pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.cleanup
pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.svnwcrevert
pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.convert_unittest
[... bunch of python3 related error as discussed on this bug]
python3-pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.convert_unittest-3.2
python3-pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.lookup-3.2
python3-pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.svnwcrevert-3.2
python3-pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.countloc-3.2
python3-pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.cleanup-3.2
python3-pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.which-3.2
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 14 errors, 18 warnings.
[X] The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[X] The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
[X] The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[X] The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines.
[X] The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
License is MIT
[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 must be included in %doc.
[X] The spec file must be written in American English.
[X] The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[X] The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
source from the src.rpm: a8cd93030e4cea9f4c5fe5da555ce8ae56d03165
rpmbuild/SOURCES/pycmd-1.0.zip
source from upstream:a8cd93030e4cea9f4c5fe5da555ce8ae56d03165
Downloads/pycmd-1.0.zip
[X] The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
Built successfully on F15 x86_64 but fails on koji due to the dependency on
python-py
[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.
[X] 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.
[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.
[X] Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[X] 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.
[X] 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.
[X] A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings.
[X] Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with
executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a
%defattr(...) line.
[X] Each package must consistently use macros.
[X] The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[NA] Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
[X] If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime
of the
[Bug 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files
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=675588 Thomas Moschny thomas.mosc...@gmx.de changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #12 from Thomas Moschny thomas.mosc...@gmx.de 2011-08-10 11:02:32 EDT --- Again many thanks to pingou for the final review, and tflink for his comments! New Package SCM Request === Package Name: pycmd Short Description: Tools for managing/searching Python related files Owners: thm Branches: f16 -- 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 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files
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=675588 --- Comment #13 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2011-08-10 11:09:32 EDT --- 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 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files
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=675588 --- Comment #3 from Tim Flink tfl...@redhat.com 2011-07-15 12:37:19 EDT --- Created attachment 513418 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=513418 patch for finer graned file/dir ownership I don't think that was enough to make/break the review but I added some finer-grained file ownership for the stuff in site-packages -- 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 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files
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=675588
--- Comment #4 from Tim Flink tfl...@redhat.com 2011-07-15 12:38:35 EDT ---
Review comments:
[ MAYBE ] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package
$ rpmlint RPMS/noarch/pycmd-1.0-1.fc14.noarch.rpm
pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.lookup
pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.countloc
pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.which
pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.cleanup
pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.svnwcrevert
pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.convert_unittest
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings.
Under F15 (i386 and x86_64) I see the following rpmlint errors:
$ rpmlint ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/python3-pycmd-1.0-2.fc15.noarch.rpm
python3-pycmd.noarch: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US
python3-pycmd.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pycountloc.pyo 2010-11-29T16:49:04
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pycountloc.py 2011-07-13T16:31:11
python3-pycmd.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pycountloc.pyc 2010-11-29T16:49:04
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pycountloc.py 2011-07-13T16:31:11
python3-pycmd.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pycleanup.pyo 2010-11-29T16:49:04
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pycleanup.py 2011-07-13T16:31:11
python3-pycmd.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pylookup.pyc 2010-11-29T16:49:04
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pylookup.py 2011-07-13T16:31:11
python3-pycmd.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pylookup.pyo 2010-11-29T16:49:04
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pylookup.py 2011-07-13T16:31:11
python3-pycmd.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pywhich.pyo 2010-11-29T16:49:04
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pywhich.py 2011-07-13T16:31:11
python3-pycmd.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/__init__.pyc 2010-11-29T16:49:04
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/__init__.py 2011-07-13T16:31:11
python3-pycmd.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pywhich.pyc 2010-11-29T16:49:04
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pywhich.py 2011-07-13T16:31:11
python3-pycmd.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/__init__.pyo 2010-11-29T16:49:04
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/__init__.py 2011-07-13T16:31:11
python3-pycmd.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pyconvert_unittest.pyc
2010-11-29T16:49:04
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pyconvert_unittest.py
2011-07-13T16:31:11
python3-pycmd.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pyconvert_unittest.pyo
2010-11-29T16:49:04
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pyconvert_unittest.py
2011-07-13T16:31:11
python3-pycmd.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pysvnwcrevert.pyo 2010-11-29T16:49:04
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pysvnwcrevert.py 2011-07-13T16:31:11
python3-pycmd.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pycleanup.pyc 2010-11-29T16:49:04
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pycleanup.py 2011-07-13T16:31:11
python3-pycmd.noarch: E: python-bytecode-inconsistent-mtime
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pysvnwcrevert.pyc 2010-11-29T16:49:04
/usr/lib/python3.2/site-packages/pycmd/pysvnwcrevert.py 2011-07-13T16:31:11
python3-pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.convert_unittest-3.2
python3-pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.lookup-3.2
python3-pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.svnwcrevert-3.2
python3-pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.countloc-3.2
python3-pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.cleanup-3.2
python3-pycmd.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary py.which-3.2
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 14 errors, 6 warnings.
There are some questions about whether or not these errors are valid or not,
will start conversation in another comment.a
[ OK ] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming
Guidelines
= Since 'py' is in the package name, it doesn't need the 'python'
prefix.
[ OK ] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name} [...]
[ ] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines
[ OK ] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license
and meet the Licensing Guidelines
= MIT License
[ OK ] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the
[Bug 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files
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=675588 Tim Flink tfl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dmalc...@redhat.com --- Comment #5 from Tim Flink tfl...@redhat.com 2011-07-15 12:48:28 EDT --- I spoke with dmalcom about the rpmlint errors in IRC and the current thought is that the modifications to the .py files in %install shouldn't cause the mtime errors showing up in rpmlint for fc15. There was a change in .pyc location for python 3.2 as described in PEP3147 (http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3147/) and it appears that distutils has yet to be updated to use the new location (http://bugs.python.org/issue11254). If I'm understanding correctly, the .py files should be byte-compiled correctly after modification in %install but something in the fc15 python3 environment is missing them. Either way, the .pyc files won't be rebuilt every time since they're not in the correct location to start off with due to the distutils 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 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files
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=675588 --- Comment #7 from Dave Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com 2011-07-15 13:00:17 EDT --- (or rpm -qplv, I guess) -- 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 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files
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=675588 Dave Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(nobody@fedoraproj ||ect.org) --- Comment #6 from Dave Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com 2011-07-15 13:00:00 EDT --- Tim or Thomas: can you post the output of rpm -qlv on each of the built packages as an attachment to this bug please. My guess is that we're getting an extra set of .pyc files within the python3 subpackage: one set in the correct location (within a __pycache__ directory), with the correct timestamp, and another in the wrong location (same dir as the .py files), as per comment #5. -- 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 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files
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=675588 --- Comment #8 from Thomas Moschny thomas.mosc...@gmx.de 2011-07-15 13:09:35 EDT --- (In reply to comment #6) My guess is that we're getting an extra set of .pyc files within the python3 subpackage: one set in the correct location (within a __pycache__ directory), with the correct timestamp, and another in the wrong location (same dir as the .py files), as per comment #5. Yes, that's indeed what is happening. Is there a workaround? -- 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 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files
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=675588 Dave Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||722578 --- Comment #9 from Dave Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com 2011-07-15 13:32:10 EDT --- I've filed bug 722578 (adding as blocking this) against python3 to track fixing the python3 distutils bug. As per workarounds, I believe that the extra .pyc files will be ignored: assuming that we also have .pyc files in the correct location within the package, then the impact is merely wasted disk space. (Seems like an rpmlint bug as well, though) -- 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 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files
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=675588 Dave Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on|722578 | -- 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 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files
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=675588 --- Comment #10 from Dave Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com 2011-07-15 13:50:17 EDT --- I've removed bug 722578 from being a blocker for this one (which wasn't my intention, I just wanted to mark the relationship) (Given that as per: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722578#c1 everything else seems to be affected by this, it seems unfair to this review to have this issue block getting this package into the distro) -- 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 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files
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=675588 Tim Flink tfl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tfl...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Tim Flink tfl...@redhat.com 2011-07-05 12:47:43 EDT --- In order to maintain feature parity with the new python-py, shouldn't this be a python2 and python3 package? -- 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 675588] Review Request: pycmd - Tools for managing/searching Python related files
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=675588 --- Comment #2 from Thomas Moschny thomas.mosc...@gmx.de 2011-07-05 13:41:11 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) In order to maintain feature parity with the new python-py, shouldn't this be a python2 and python3 package? Yeah, why not. Here we go: Spec URL: http://thm.fedorapeople.org/pycmd/pycmd.spec SRPM URL: http://thm.fedorapeople.org/pycmd/pycmd-1.0-2.fc15.src.rpm %changelog * Tue Jul 5 2011 Thomas Moschny .. - 1.0-2 - Python3 subpackage. -- 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
