https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1140577 --- Comment #3 from Sergio Pascual <sergio.pasra@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Jerry James from comment #2) > I only see a few issues with this package, none a MUST. > > 1. Please use the new %license tag; i.e., change this: > > %doc LICENSE README > > to this: > > %license LICENSE > %doc README Done! > > 2. Consider adding a %check section. It could look like this: > (snip) Done! I tried running the tests with nosetest, py.test and unittest. I didn't realize I just had to run python. When I have time I will contact upstream and ask about the tests. > 3. Finally, what is the rationale for not packaging the tools in %{_bindir}? > If there are any conceivable users of the tools, perhaps they could be > packaged in a -tools subpackage. If they are definitely not useful for > the > general public, then what you have already done is fine, of course. > The purpose of the scripts seems to be debugging. unpickle.py just prints the output of dill.load run over the the files in the tool command line. get_objgraph.py plots a graph of dill types using objgraph; but objgraph is not in Fedora. Furthermore, I don't know if this tool is useful for normal users. That's why I have excluded them. Spec URL: http://guaix.fis.ucm.es/~spr/fedora/python-dill.spec SRPM URL: http://guaix.fis.ucm.es/~spr/fedora/python-dill-0.2.1-2.fc22.src.rpm -- 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