[Bug 810376] Review Request: python-pypng - Python PNG encoder/decoder
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810376 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Last Closed||2015-05-12 13:03:14 --- Comment #24 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl --- That's embarrassing. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1096350 *** -- 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 810376] Review Request: python-pypng - Python PNG encoder/decoder
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810376 --- Comment #25 from Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com --- (In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #24) That's embarrassing. Heh. Well, happens sometimes. :) I forget what I even wanted this for, by now. :) -- 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 810376] Review Request: python-pypng - Python PNG encoder/decoder
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810376 --- Comment #26 from Pete Zaitcev zait...@redhat.com --- Sadly I know of no alternative. I need to generate some kind of picture http://zaitcev.livejournal.com/220516.html https://github.com/zaitcev/glie I'm open to co-maintaining it in Fedora. I don't have a PP bit, but I have several packages, including Python based. -- 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 810376] Review Request: python-pypng - Python PNG encoder/decoder
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810376 --- Comment #27 from Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com --- Pete, it looks like the package is approved and pushed in the other bug. I'm sure Ralph would be happy for a comaintainer. -- 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 810376] Review Request: python-pypng - Python PNG encoder/decoder
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810376 --- Comment #23 from Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com --- Oh hi. Thanks for the ping. (png? hmm.) Updated to newest upstream version: Spec URL: http://mattdm.org/misc/fedora/python-pypng.spec SRPM URL: http://mattdm.org/misc/fedora/python-pypng-0.0.17-1.fc22.mattdm.src.rpm What is the correct thing to do with python3 at this point? The readme notes PyPNG also works on Python 3.x if you use the 2to3 tool which it should do automatically (this support is very recent, and preliminary). I assume that should be done and a python3 subpackage created? -- 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 810376] Review Request: python-pypng - Python PNG encoder/decoder
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810376 --- Comment #22 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl --- Ping? -- 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 810376] Review Request: python-pypng - Python PNG encoder/decoder
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810376 --- Comment #19 from Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com --- Pete / Zbigniew, what do you think of Jerry's changes? I'm kind of thinking we should get the initial package through review as Pete's version, and then add Jerry's enhancements 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 810376] Review Request: python-pypng - Python PNG encoder/decoder
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810376 --- Comment #20 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl --- (In reply to Matthew Miller from comment #19) Pete / Zbigniew, what do you think of Jerry's changes? I'm kind of thinking we should get the initial package through review as Pete's version Both should be OK... But why wait, let's incorporate the changes now while they're hot. -- 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 810376] Review Request: python-pypng - Python PNG encoder/decoder
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810376 --- Comment #21 from Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com --- I'm a little worried about the non-upstreamed changes, simply because I don't have time to test them and that seems a little irresponsible. But if you all think it's good I'm fine with full-steam ahead. :) -- 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 810376] Review Request: python-pypng - Python PNG encoder/decoder
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810376 --- Comment #16 from Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com --- Whoo, thanks everyone. I'm in Brno at DevConf right now, but I'll try to get to the updates RSN. Pete, do you want to be a co-maintainer? I'm still interested but I literally forget what project I wanted this for in the first place. :) -- 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 810376] Review Request: python-pypng - Python PNG encoder/decoder
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810376 --- Comment #17 from Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com --- Please pardon yet another 3rd party jumping in with proposed spec file enhancements: http://jjames.fedorapeople.org/pypng/ This incorporates all of the suggestions above, and also: - Uses upstream's tar.gz release instead of its zip release - Enables the optional Cython interface, which can speed up png file reading - Ships the example code - Preserves timestamps when removing /usr/bin/env - Builds the documentation with Sphinx - Cleans up the python3 build dir It does NOT ship both python2 and python3 versions of the examples, because that just seems too complicated -- 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 810376] Review Request: python-pypng - Python PNG encoder/decoder
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810376 --- Comment #18 from Pete Zaitcev zait...@redhat.com --- (In reply to Matthew Miller from comment #16) Pete, do you want to be a co-maintainer? Yeah, I'll take it. If Spot maintains 300 packages... -- 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 810376] Review Request: python-pypng - Python PNG encoder/decoder
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810376 Kalev Lember kalevlem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW Assignee|kalevlem...@gmail.com |nob...@fedoraproject.org Flags|fedora-review? | --- Comment #14 from Kalev Lember kalevlem...@gmail.com --- Zbigniew, please do, I don't mind at all. -- 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 810376] Review Request: python-pypng - Python PNG encoder/decoder
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810376
--- Comment #15 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl ---
Nice and clean, with minor issues:
Issues:
===
- Upstream URL has changed to https://github.com/drj11/pypng
- BR should be changed to python2-devel according to the Python Guidelines
- %check could run nosetests png.py
- It would be great to incorporate the changes to add python3-pypng from
comment #12.
= 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.
[!]: 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.
%doc LICENCE can be added
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[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.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[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 10240 bytes in 1 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]: 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]: 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]: 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.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[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.
[?]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL).
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless
[Bug 810376] Review Request: python-pypng - Python PNG encoder/decoder
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810376 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zbys...@in.waw.pl 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 810376] Review Request: python-pypng - Python PNG encoder/decoder
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810376 --- Comment #12 from Pete Zaitcev zait...@redhat.com --- Mattew, any plans for python3-pypng? I threw together a quick-fix SPEC based on yours: http://people.redhat.com/zaitcev/tmp/python-pypng-0.0.16-1.z1.spec -- 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 810376] Review Request: python-pypng - Python PNG encoder/decoder
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810376 --- Comment #13 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl --- Does anyone mind if I take over the 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 810376] Review Request: python-pypng - Python PNG encoder/decoder
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810376 Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: pypng - |Review Request: |Python PNG encoder/decoder |python-pypng - Python PNG ||encoder/decoder --- Comment #11 from Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com --- Hey look, an update! Spec URL: http://mattdm.org/misc/fedora/python-pypng.spec SRPM URL: http://mattdm.org/misc/fedora/python-pypng-0.0.16-1.fc19.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
