https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
Dan Radez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
Alan Pevec (Fedora) changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
--- Comment #23 from Alan
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
Alan Pevec (Fedora) changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |
--
You are receiving this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
Alan Pevec (Fedora) changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|ape...@gmail.com, |
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: Package Review
Alan Pevec (Fedora) has canceled Package Review
's request for Alan Pevec (Fedora)
's needinfo:
Bug 1407000: Review Request: python-PuLP - LP modeler written in python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
--- Comment
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
--- Comment #20 from Dan Radez ---
Sure thing, I'll take some time today to get the conflict put in to get it
moved forward.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
--- Comment #19 from Javier Peña ---
My understanding from
https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/671#comment-436821 is that we can
go ahead with the package, declaring an explicit Conflicts: (as it is done in
the
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
Alan Pevec changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|1327635, 1373513|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
Alan Pevec changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|1418855 |
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
Alan Pevec changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||1418855
Referenced
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
--- Comment #18 from Alan Pevec ---
Asked nicely in https://pulp.plan.io/issues/2531
got nice reply in https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/671#comment:4
so we are proceeding with Conflicts: solution in this review, while
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
--- Comment #17 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski ---
(In reply to Alan Pevec from comment #16)
> This matches 2nd case, name conflict of not compatible libs :
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
--- Comment #16 from Alan Pevec ---
This matches 2nd case, name conflict of not compatible libs :
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Conflicts#Library_Name_Conflicts
Guideline requires to ask one of the upstreams to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
Alan Pevec changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Review Request: python-pulp |Review Request:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
--- Comment #15 from Dan Radez ---
I've updated these files according to Haikel's recommendation:
https://radez.fedorapeople.org/python-PuLP.spec
https://radez.fedorapeople.org/python-PuLP-1.6.1-2.fc25.src.rpm
--
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
Haïkel Guémar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(hgue...@redhat.co |
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
Haïkel Guémar changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
Alan Pevec changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
--- Comment #12 from Alan Pevec ---
One more thing, sorry for more ping-pong, naming of py2/3 version of binaries
is not following https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Naming
If shipping both, they need to be
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
--- Comment #11 from Dan Radez ---
Updated these links:
https://radez.fedorapeople.org/python-pulp.spec
https://radez.fedorapeople.org/python-pulp-1.6.1-2.fc25.src.rpm
license is now set to just MIT
--
You are receiving
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
--- Comment #10 from Alan Pevec ---
ok, fedora-review is not that smart "MIT/X11 (BSD like)" is not listed at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main#Software_License_List
It should be simply License: MIT
LICENSE text
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
--- Comment #9 from Dan Radez ---
Updated these links:
https://radez.fedorapeople.org/python-pulp.spec
https://radez.fedorapeople.org/python-pulp-1.6.1-2.fc25.src.rpm
license is now set to MIT/X11 (BSD like)
--
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
Alan Pevec changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
--- Comment #7 from Dan Radez ---
Great, in that case let's use these links to proceed:
https://radez.fedorapeople.org/python-pulp.spec
https://radez.fedorapeople.org/python-pulp-1.6.1-2.fc25.src.rpm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
--- Comment #6 from Alan Pevec ---
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Naming?rd=Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Python_modules
suggests
"take into account the name of the module used when importing it in Python
scripts"
In
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
--- Comment #5 from Dan Radez ---
Actually just put both versions up there for which ever way is decided to be
used:
https://radez.fedorapeople.org/python-pulp.spec
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
--- Comment #4 from Dan Radez ---
I agree with you that I would prefer the lower case. The upstream appears to
use lowercase.
Though, there is already a project called pulp in fedora, dnf search pulp shows
a couple dozen
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
--- Comment #3 from Alan Pevec ---
fedora-review complains about spec/SRPM name diff:
- Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
Note: python-pulp.spec should be python-PuLP.spec
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
Alan Pevec changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ape...@gmail.com
--
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
Dan Radez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||1327635, 1373513
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1407000
--- Comment #1 from Dan Radez ---
Koji Build here: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17021666
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about
31 matches
Mail list logo