[Bug 1202265] Review Request: python-grabserial - Reads a serial port and writes data to standard output

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

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1202265

Parag AN(पराग) <panemade@xxxxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
             Blocks|                            |177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR)
           Assignee|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    |panemade@xxxxxxxxx
              Flags|                            |fedora-review?



--- Comment #2 from Parag AN(पराग) <panemade@xxxxxxxxx> ---
+ is OK
- Needs work

Review:
+ Package builds fine in mock F23 x86_64

+ rpmlint on generated rpms gave output
python-grabserial.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary grabserial
python-grabserial.src: W: invalid-url Source0:
https://github.com/tbird20d/grabserial/releases/download/v1.7.1/grabserial-1.7.1.tar.gz
HTTP Error 403: Forbidden
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

===> I see wget is working fine with Source0 url so we can ignore the forbidden
warning. This looks like a github issue.

+ Source verified with upstream as sha256sum
tarball in srpm:
7354449842439cb1d119bff99857ad23e955facff9915260433eb5385a6366af
tarball in upstream:
7354449842439cb1d119bff99857ad23e955facff9915260433eb5385a6366af

- License tag LGPLv2 is wrong it should be GPLv2+. Please check license file
text and see its not Lesser and also words "any later version" which concludes
GPLv2+

- Macros are not correct. use %{python2_sitelib}

Suggestions:
1) I will suggest a cosmetic change to write the %files section as
%files
%doc README
%license LICENSE
%{_bindir}/grabserial
%{python2_sitelib}/*.egg-info

2) I see that pyserial is also available for python3. Maybe try asking upstream
to make this Grabserial project compatible with python3. Then you can add
python3 subpackage in spec as given in Fedora Python packaging guidelines. 
Note this point is not a blocker for this review but just a suggestion from me.

Please submit the new SPEC and SRPM by bumping the release tag to -2 and adding
appropriate changelog entry and provide new package links for further review.


Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841
[Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a
sponsor
-- 
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





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