Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508188 --- Comment #5 from David Nalley <david@xxxxxxx> 2009-06-28 12:51:05 EDT --- > As in the other review, I would urge some elaboration of the acronym stew that > is the description. I left the common stuff such as SNMP and HTTP but added acronym expansions for CIM and WBEM, and a brief explanation of WBEM. > > You could drop BuildRequires: python, although it doesn't hurt anything to have > it. Done > > Are you sure it's wise to rename the executables? Of course, the other review > renamed the executables to mofcomp and pywbemcli, so perhaps there's simply no > standard for the names of these executables. Maybe it's worth checking with > upstream about this. I renamed the executables per: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Unnecessary_Byte_compilation That said, the pyc and pyo in question still get generated by setup.py, just not in bin_dir, they remain in python_sitelib. I suppose I could rename the two scripts in question in %prep. But that isn't the bug directly referenced by the packaging guidelines note. That said, I assume since Tim is at least part of upstream that his naming is ok, and thus I changed mine to reflect what his symlink names were. > > twisted_client.py seems to depends on python-twisted; should that be a runtime > dependency? It should be, thanks for catching that. It's added in the next version. > <lots snipped> http://ke4qqq.fedorapeople.org/pywbem.spec http://ke4qqq.fedorapeople.org/pywbem-0.7.0-2.fc11.src.rpm Thanks for the review! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review