[Bug 835823] Review Request: python-lettuce - Behaviour Driven Development for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=835823 Bohuslav Slavek Kabrda bkab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2012-07-13 04:06:15 -- 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 835823] Review Request: python-lettuce - Behaviour Driven Development for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=835823 Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mru...@matthias-runge.de Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #5 from Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de --- Yepp, taking this one. John, I guess (I'm nearly 100% sure), Slavek is targeting towards F18; python-fuzzywuzzy and python-sure are built and pushed to rawhide (currently the same as f18) -- 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 835823] Review Request: python-lettuce - Behaviour Driven Development for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=835823 --- Comment #6 from Bohuslav Slavek Kabrda bkab...@redhat.com --- (In reply to comment #5) Yepp, taking this one. John, I guess (I'm nearly 100% sure), Slavek is targeting towards F18; python-fuzzywuzzy and python-sure are built and pushed to rawhide (currently the same as f18) Yes, exactly. John, if you wish to use lettuce in F17 or below (or EPEL), I can make some modifications to the specfile, so that it works with Django package - drop me a line, if you want 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 835823] Review Request: python-lettuce - Behaviour Driven Development for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=835823 --- Comment #7 from John Morris j...@zultron.com --- Hi Bohuslav, I was shooting around to do an informal review, since I'm learning the ropes around here, and thought this package looked cool. Don't do anything special for me, but I'll be keeping an eye on this package. Appreciate the kind offer! -- 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 835823] Review Request: python-lettuce - Behaviour Driven Development for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=835823 --- Comment #8 from Bohuslav Slavek Kabrda bkab...@redhat.com --- (In reply to comment #7) Hi Bohuslav, I was shooting around to do an informal review, since I'm learning the ropes around here, and thought this package looked cool. Don't do anything special for me, but I'll be keeping an eye on this package. Appreciate the kind offer! Sure, watch and learn, Matthias does good reviews. If you need any help/guidance with Fedora packaging, feel free to ask. Commenting reviews and asking others is for sure the best way to learn reviewing. -- 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 835823] Review Request: python-lettuce - Behaviour Driven Development for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=835823
Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #9 from Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de ---
Naa!
Slavek produces high quality packages making it very easy for me to review.
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Pass
! = Fail
? = Not evaluated
Generic
[x]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at
least one supported primary architecture.
[x]: MUST %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Buildroot is not present
Note: Unless packager wants to package for EPEL5 this is fine
[x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
Note: Clean would be needed if support for EPEL is required
[x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm 4.4
Note: Note: defattr macros not found. They would be needed for EPEL5
[x]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: MUST Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: MUST Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: MUST Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: MUST Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: MUST Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[x]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
Note: rm -rf would be needed if support for EPEL5 is required
[-]: MUST Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[x]: MUST 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]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: MUST Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: MUST Package installs properly.
[x]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent.
rpmlint python-lettuce-0.2.5-1.fc18.src.rpm
python-lettuce.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Behaviour - Behavior
python-lettuce.src:15: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 4, tab:
line 15)
python-lettuce.src: W: invalid-url Source1: lettuce-0.2.5-tests.tgz
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
rpmlint python-lettuce-0.2.5-1.fc18.noarch.rpm
python-lettuce.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Behaviour - Behavior
python-lettuce.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/lettuce/bin.py 0644L /usr/bin/env
python-lettuce.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary lettuce
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings.
[x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
/home/mrunge/review/835823/lettuce-0.2.5.tar.gz :
MD5SUM this package : 2352c761aa34423b773a104810201f15
MD5SUM upstream package : 2352c761aa34423b773a104810201f15
[x]: MUST Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: MUST Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[-]: MUST Package contains a SysV-style init script if in need of one.
[x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8.
[-]: MUST Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: SHOULD 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]: SHOULD Dist tag is present.
[x]: SHOULD No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin,
/usr/sbin.
[x]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q
--requires).
[?]: SHOULD Package functions as described.
[x]: SHOULD Latest version is packaged.
[x]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from
upstream.
[Bug 835823] Review Request: python-lettuce - Behaviour Driven Development for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=835823 Bohuslav Slavek Kabrda bkab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #10 from Bohuslav Slavek Kabrda bkab...@redhat.com --- Thanks for review Matthias, I'll for sure fix the mentioned issues before comitting. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-lettuce Short Description: Behaviour Driven Development for Python Owners: bkabrda Branches: InitialCC: -- 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 835823] Review Request: python-lettuce - Behaviour Driven Development for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=835823 --- Comment #11 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 835823] Review Request: python-lettuce - Behaviour Driven Development for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=835823 John Morris j...@zultron.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||j...@zultron.com --- Comment #3 from John Morris j...@zultron.com --- Hi Bohuslav, There's no 'python-django' package in Fedora. Did you mean 'Django'? Once python-fuzzywuzzy and python-sure make it into the testing repos I'll give it another whirl. -- 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 835823] Review Request: python-lettuce - Behaviour Driven Development for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=835823 --- Comment #4 from Bohuslav Slavek Kabrda bkab...@redhat.com --- (In reply to comment #3) Hi Bohuslav, There's no 'python-django' package in Fedora. Did you mean 'Django'? Yes, it is. Django has been renamed to python-django beginning with F18 - see https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/146. Once python-fuzzywuzzy and python-sure make it into the testing repos I'll give it another whirl. I thing Matthias may have wanted to take this review, but I think he won't mind if you take it. Thanks. -- 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 835823] Review Request: python-lettuce - Behaviour Driven Development for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=835823 Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mru...@matthias-runge.de --- Comment #1 from Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de --- Some small comments: According to https://github.com/gabrielfalcao/lettuce license is GPLv3+ and latest version is 0.2.5 -- 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 835823] Review Request: python-lettuce - Behaviour Driven Development for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=835823 --- Comment #2 from Bohuslav Slavek Kabrda bkab...@redhat.com --- Thanks. I was working on the package quite some time so I didn't notice the newest version; I fixed the license (I guess I'm relying on pyp2rpm too much...), and also URL. Here are updated SPEC and SRPM: SPEC: http://bkabrda.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/lettuce/python-lettuce.spec SRPM: http://bkabrda.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/lettuce/python-lettuce-0.2.5-1.fc17.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
