[Bug 865915] Review Request: python-py9p - Pure Python implementation of 9p protocol
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=865915 Saveliev Peter changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2012-11-07 12:12:49 -- 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 865915] Review Request: python-py9p - Pure Python implementation of 9p protocol
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=865915 --- Comment #12 from Jon Ciesla --- 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 865915] Review Request: python-py9p - Pure Python implementation of 9p protocol
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=865915 Saveliev Peter changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #11 from Saveliev Peter --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-py9p Short Description: Pure Python implementation of 9P protocol (Plan9) Owners: psavelye Branches: f16 f17 f18 el6 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 865915] Review Request: python-py9p - Pure Python implementation of 9p protocol
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=865915 --- Comment #10 from Saveliev Peter --- removed «env» clauses and fixed pep8 issues and 99% of pyflakes warnings (two remaining issues need some more time to fix, but the code works) uploaded new tgz and rpms -- 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 865915] Review Request: python-py9p - Pure Python implementation of 9p protocol
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=865915 --- Comment #9 from Peter Lemenkov --- (In reply to comment #5) > > Thanks. Can I remove the «env» clause in this build, or should do in the > next one? If you don't have any objections against it, then I think it's better to remove it asap - in the current build. (In reply to comment #8) > But right now there is a little help from the short username… fedora-cvs > flag is not available for me, despite the mail in my Fedora accaunt is the > same as in this bug, and there I'm in Fedora Bugs Group. Unfortunately I can't help much here - you should poke some of your fellow redhatters for that (informal, fast, and efficient way). I suspect that there is something extra required in case of RedHat accounts but I could be wrong. -- 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 865915] Review Request: python-py9p - Pure Python implementation of 9p protocol
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=865915 --- Comment #8 from Saveliev Peter --- But right now there is a little help from the short username… fedora-cvs flag is not available for me, despite the mail in my Fedora accaunt is the same as in this bug, and there I'm in Fedora Bugs Group. -- 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 865915] Review Request: python-py9p - Pure Python implementation of 9p protocol
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=865915 --- Comment #7 from Saveliev Peter --- Peter, should I remove FE_NEEDSPONSOR from this package — https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=865630 ? Or, maybe, can I abuse you with its review also? -- 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 865915] Review Request: python-py9p - Pure Python implementation of 9p protocol
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=865915 --- Comment #6 from Saveliev Peter --- (In reply to comment #2) > > psavelye > > I wonder why Red Hat still restricts user names to 8 symbols? What year is > in Brno now? For me it is no problem as long as they keep my short mail alias :) -- 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 865915] Review Request: python-py9p - Pure Python implementation of 9p protocol
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=865915 --- Comment #5 from Saveliev Peter --- (In reply to comment #4) > python-py9p.noarch: E: non-executable-script > /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/py9p/sk1.py 0644L /usr/bin/env > > ^^^ I don't think this is a blocker but I don't see any reason why these > files should be executed directly. So could you, please, add something like > this to the %prep section: > > sed -i -e "1d" py9p/pki.py py9p/py9p.py py9p/sk1.py Since I maintain this fork, I think, we can just remove the line from the source code: it is of no use here. > I don't see any issues (except the small almost cosmetic one with > /usr/bin/enb noted above) so this package is > > APPROVED. Thanks. Can I remove the «env» clause in this build, or should do in the next one? -- 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 865915] Review Request: python-py9p - Pure Python implementation of 9p protocol
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=865915
Peter Lemenkov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Peter Lemenkov ---
Koji scratchbuild for Rawhide:
* http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4586979
REVIEW:
Legend: + = PASSED, - = FAILED, 0 = Not Applicable
+/- rpmlint is NOT silent
sulaco ~/rpmbuild/SPECS: rpmlint
~/rpmbuild/SRPMS/python-py9p-1.0.1-1.fc19.src.rpm
~/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/python-py9p-1.0.1-1.fc19.noarch.rpm
python-py9p.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pyvfs -> payoffs
python-py9p.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pyvfs -> payoffs
^^^ false positive
python-py9p.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/py9p/py9p.py 0644L /usr/bin/env
python-py9p.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/py9p/pki.py 0644L /usr/bin/env
python-py9p.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/py9p/sk1.py 0644L /usr/bin/env
^^^ I don't think this is a blocker but I don't see any reason why these files
should be executed directly. So could you, please, add something like this to
the %prep section:
sed -i -e "1d" py9p/pki.py py9p/py9p.py py9p/sk1.py
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 2 warnings.
sulaco ~/rpmbuild/SPECS:
+ The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
+ The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
+ The package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
+ The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
Licensing Guidelines.
+ The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license (MIT).
+ The file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package, is included
in %doc.
+ The spec file is written in American English.
+ The spec file for the package is legible.
+ The sources used to build the package, match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
sulaco ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES: sha256sum py9p-1.0.1.tar.gz*
9286733887750c629fff6eca33db0a1e0449efbd73cff2d466127164d2e2
py9p-1.0.1.tar.gz
9286733887750c629fff6eca33db0a1e0449efbd73cff2d466127164d2e2
py9p-1.0.1.tar.gz.1
sulaco ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES:
+ The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
primary architecture. See koji link above.
+ All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
0 No need to handle locales.
0 No shared library files.
+ The package does NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
+ The package is not designed to be relocatable.
+ The package owns all directories that it creates.
+ The package does not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files
listings.
+ Permissions on files are set properly.
+ The package consistently uses macros. Well, to be honest in order to fully
comply to this requirement you should replace the only $RPM_BUILD_ROOT instance
to %{buildroot} but I wouldn't really insist on this.
+ The package contains code, or permissible content.
0 No extremely large documentation files.
+ Anything, the package includes as %doc, does not affect the runtime of the
application.
0 No header files.
0 No static libraries.
0 No pkgconfig(.pc) files.
0 The package doesn't contain library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1).
0 No devel sub-package.
+ The package does NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
0 Not a GUI application.
+ The package does not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
+ All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8.
I don't see any issues (except the small almost cosmetic one with /usr/bin/enb
noted above) so this package is
APPROVED.
--
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 865915] Review Request: python-py9p - Pure Python implementation of 9p protocol
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=865915 Peter Lemenkov changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | --- Comment #3 from Peter Lemenkov --- Lifting FE-NEEDSPONSOR - I've just sponsored Peter. -- 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 865915] Review Request: python-py9p - Pure Python implementation of 9p protocol
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=865915 --- Comment #2 from Peter Lemenkov --- > psavelye I wonder why Red Hat still restricts user names to 8 symbols? What year is in Brno now? -- 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 865915] Review Request: python-py9p - Pure Python implementation of 9p protocol
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=865915 Peter Lemenkov changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||lemen...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|lemen...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Peter Lemenkov --- I'll review it (and will sponsor you apparently). -- 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 865915] Review Request: python-py9p - Pure Python implementation of 9p protocol
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=865915 Saveliev Peter changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) Alias||python-py9p -- 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
