https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806117 Christopher Meng <cickumqt@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|cickumqt@xxxxxxxxx | --- Comment #22 from Christopher Meng <cickumqt@xxxxxxxxx> --- Thank you. New thoughts only stand by me: 1. It's packager's choice to choose which kind of sources should they use for packaging, however I always choose the smallest one. In this case, I would choose tar.gz sources instead of zipball as RPM Source0 tag. But, since only differences is 7 kb, I think it's trivial to let you change. 2. I can see that this package support python3, as many reviewer have said, you should enable python3 subpackage, and Fedora 22(maybe higher) will set python3 as default stack so you'd better do that. Currently the way of supporting python3 in your spec is invalid, checkout a template or do it by yourself: http://cicku.me/python-pygit2.spec 3. In pace with python3's moving on, you should set old python2 macro from unversioned to versioned: %{__python} --> %{__python2} %{python_sitelib} --> %{python2_sitelib} 4. Upstream has clearly told you that this package supports testing: " Run python3 test_main.py. Do note that Python 3 is required to run the test suite." So you should add check section for it. 5. I don't know which name is better, Oplop or oplop? Because Oplop is the tarball name, but I'm not sure about naming the package now for python packages, maybe Eduardo can answer that. ;) ------------ I will let Eduardo finish this review and quit now. -- 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 component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review