https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1240116 --- Comment #5 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Javier Peña from comment #4) > - I think it might be better to fetch the source code directly from GitHub > or PyPi. I have been doing some tests using > https://pypi.python.org/packages/source/m/%{pypi_name}/%{pypi_name}- > %{version}.tar.gz and it works fine for me (with some details, see below). Pff, the situation is more complicated than that. I forgot to update the comment to describe how the tarball was generated. I made a pull request (https://github.com/cuthbertLab/music21/pull/100) and update the comments in the spec file. > - At least on the PyPi source, license is included in a license.txt file > together with the sources, so you can use "%license > %{python2_sitelib}/music21/license.txt" with it. > > - I see the sources include some external libraries in music.ext, and your > spec file patches them manually using sed to avoid library bundling. Is > there any open request upstream to avoid this? I haven't submitted my patches upstream yet. It would be nice if upstream refactored the code to try to import external modules first, before falling back to the bundled ones, so that unbundling could be done transparently... I wanted to wait until the review before I submit stuff upstream, in case other issues are found. > - rpmlint complains twice about macro-in-comment, and mixed spaces and tabs > in line 29. Fixed! > Please be aware that this is an informal review. Thanks for the comments. Spec URL: http://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/python-music21.spec SRPM URL: http://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/python-music21-2.0.5-2.fc23.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