https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123618
Miro Hrončok changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|POST|CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123618
--- Comment #26 from Miro Hrončok ---
Yes for Fedora 37.
For EPEL 9 it is a bit more complex. The package is not in EPEL but in RHEL,
but the fix will eventually land there. However, if python-hatchling is not
updated in EPEL 9, it will
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123618
--- Comment #25 from Parag Nemade ---
I am planning to add this package to Fedora 37 and EPEL9 as well. Will that fix
be available in F37 and EPEL9 as well?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123618
--- Comment #24 from Miro Hrončok ---
Also note that I am working on bz2127946 which will mark
%{python3_sitelib}/hatch_fancy_pypi_readme-%{version}.dist-info/licenses/AUTHORS.md
as %license, not %doc. You might want to make that consistent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123618
--- Comment #23 from Gwyn Ciesla ---
(fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-hatch-fancy-pypi-readme
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123618
--- Comment #22 from Parag Nemade ---
Thank you. I will take care of that at the time of package import.
--
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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123618
--- Comment #21 from Miro Hrončok ---
%global pypi_name hatch-fancy-pypi-readme
This is now redundant.
I have reviewed the changes, looks great :)
--
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=2123618
--- Comment #20 from Parag Nemade ---
Thank you Miro for this detailed package review.
I have included all your suggestions here.
Spec URL:
https://pnemade.fedorapeople.org/fedora-work/SPECS/python-hatch-fancy-pypi-readme.spec
SRPM URL:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123618
Miro Hrončok changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|POST
Flags|fedora-review?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123618
--- Comment #18 from Miro Hrončok ---
Running Fedora review. In the meantime, I re-read the spec file.
> %global pypi_name hatch-fancy-pypi-readme
(opinionated, feel free to ignore me) Defining a macro like this and reusing it
in the spec
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123618
Miro Hrončok changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-review?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123618
--- Comment #17 from Miro Hrončok ---
- Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
Note: warning: File listed twice: /usr/lib/python3.11/site-
packages/hatch_fancy_pypi_readme-22.3.0.dist-info/licenses/AUTHORS.md
See:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123618
--- Comment #16 from Sandro ---
Created attachment 1910404
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1910404=edit
Patch solving AUTHORS.md installed in licenses
For version -2 fedora-review reports the issues below:
Issues:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123618
--- Comment #15 from Parag Nemade ---
Based on upstream discussions, I think we should be good with using the update
I provided above -2 release for this package in Fedora.
Can someone please do official review and approve it. I need this to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123618
--- Comment #14 from Sandro ---
(In reply to Parag Nemade from comment #10)
> Fixed both the issues above discussed.
Unfortunately, that leads to a duplicate file warning for AUTHORS.md in
addition to the warning that the file is not marked
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123618
--- Comment #13 from Parag Nemade ---
Thank you for your quick reply.
As this is minor update, I just regenerated -2 release of this package.
Spec URL:
https://pnemade.fedorapeople.org/fedora-work/SPECS/python-hatch-fancy-pypi-readme.spec
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123618
--- Comment #11 from Miro Hrončok ---
> Just can someone confirm if installation of this dynamic buildrequires
> python3-tox-current-env is really correct?
-t stands for tox. It uses tox-current-env. So yes, this is correct.
However, since
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123618
--- Comment #10 from Parag Nemade ---
Fixed both the issues above discussed.
Just can someone confirm if installation of this dynamic buildrequires
python3-tox-current-env is really correct?
Spec URL:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123618
Sandro changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment|0 |1
#1909545 is|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123618
--- Comment #8 from Miro Hrončok ---
Please also drop coverage[toml], as did upstream. See
https://github.com/hynek/hatch-fancy-pypi-readme/commit/6c06d7244183c5b71aed905c9950e3206e5f0a9e
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123618
--- Comment #7 from Sandro ---
Created attachment 1909545
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1909545=edit
Remove unused dependency from pyproject.toml
With the attached patch included in the spec file you can drop all
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123618
Miro Hrončok changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mhron...@redhat.com
--- Comment #6
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123618
--- Comment #5 from Sandro ---
One more (minor) thing I forgot to mention:
I would suggest using consistent naming in the BuildRequires. You added some
for running the tests. For consistency and better readability I would change
these to:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123618
--- Comment #4 from Sandro ---
(In reply to Parag Nemade from comment #3)
> (In reply to Sandro from comment #2)
>
> Thank you for having a look at this package.
>
> > Issues:
> > ===
> > - If (and only if) the source package includes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123618
--- Comment #3 from Parag Nemade ---
(In reply to Sandro from comment #2)
Thank you for having a look at this package.
> Issues:
> ===
> - If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
> in its own file, then
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123618
Sandro changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gui...@penguinpee.nl
--- Comment #2 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2123618
--- Comment #1 from Parag Nemade ---
This package built on koji:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=91519810
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about
27 matches
Mail list logo
