[Bug 985967] Review Request: python-arc - Autotest RPC Client libraries and tools

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=985967

--- Comment #8 from Cleber Rodrigues <crosa@xxxxxxxxxx> ---
(In reply to Eduardo Echeverria from comment #7)
> (In reply to Cleber Rodrigues from comment #6)
> > (In reply to Eduardo Echeverria from comment #3)
> > > Hi clever:
> > 
> > Thanks for calling me "clever", but judging from the amount of mistakes here
> > I wouldn't call myself that :)
> 
> Hi Cleber, have mistakes doesn't make less "clever" ;)
> 
> 
> > > Please provide the full url in Source0 (https://github.com/clebergnu/arc) ,
> > > for this, handle the url following the recommendations exposed in
> > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Github
> > 
> > Is is possible to only use the version tag for the Source URL, such as:
> > 
> > Source0: https://github.com/clebergnu/%{shortname}/archive/v%{version}.tar.gz
> > 
> > Instead of the commit hash? Since I plan to also host the Fedora spec file
> > on the upstream repo, this would create an "egg and chicken" kind of problem.
> 
> No, isn't possible, precisely this guideline contemplates the need of a hash
> for identify the commit that you are packing, i cite the guideline "For a
> number of reasons (immutability, availability, uniqueness), you must use the
> full commit revision hash when referring to the sources"
> 
> This can be solved:
> - You can make a version of the spec on-demand generated by a makefile
> target in the upstream repo, doing a snapshot automatically. FYI, this
> method isn't valid for fedora

OK, I think I'll handle this by having a branch/tag with the commit changes to
the spec file only. Say, for the 1.0.0 release, I would have:

v1.0.0
v1.0.0-spec

The diff between the two would simply be the "%global commit ..." line.

> 
> > > 
> > > Use in BuildRequires: python2-devel instead of python >= 2.7, see
> > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#BuildRequires
> > > 
> > > Requires: python >= 2.7
> > 
> For build a package made in python, you should have as BR python{2,3}-devel
> depending of the implementation (in this case python2-devel).
> in the Requires isn't neccesary use explicit versioning since that the
> system-wide Fedora version is 2.7 
> 
> ➜  ~  repoquery -qf python
> python-0:2.7.5-1.fc19.x86_64
> python-0:2.7.5-3.fc19.x86_64
> python-0:2.7.5-3.fc19.i686
> python-0:2.7.5-1.fc19.i686
> 

OK, got it!

> 
> > > 
> > > rpmlint out: 
> > > 
> > > python-arc.noarch: W: no-documentation
> > > Add license, README, etc in %doc (btw, not is included in your spec)
> > 
> > OK. BTW, is it OK to use "README.md" as the "official README"?
> 
> Yes, i don't see any problem.
> 
> > >  
> > > python-arc.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
> > > /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/arc/jsonrpc.py
> > > the license header haven't a fsf updated address, that would a minor
> > > problem, if it were not because also part of a library from another project,
> > > this in fedora have a clear policy, see 
> > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries
> > 
> > Since this is a "library" with about 60 lines of code that was modified for
> > arc's requirements, and it's not packaged in Fedora, I assume it's OK to
> > "bundle" it, but update the FSF address to remove this noise. Right?
> > 
> 
> What would happen if that project ends up being packaged in Fedora? 
> Can you commit your changes in upstream? 
> Are your changes a deviation of the original project? 

I've decided to rewrite this module to remove this problem and make the code
more in line with the general code style of the project.

> 
> 
> Best Regards

Thank you for the review/help so far!

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=MMoAFC4YTi&a=cc_unsubscribe
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review





[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]