https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1249749 --- Comment #2 from René Ribaud <rene.ribaud@xxxxxxxxx> --- Hello William, Here are the results of my first review : 1- The package is not following package naming guidelines. Extracted from the doc : "So all python3 modules MUST have python3 in their name." So naming should be python3-pyjf3 2- The source URL in the package is not valid. (folder k instead of p) 3- I think you should leverage a bit your .spec from https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python example, using macros definition at the beginning, etc... 4- Regarding the license, as a short term solution, you should extract the README.rst Copyright section and place it into a license.rst file in %prep part (wih sed). Then introduce a %license directive in the %files part referencing license.rst. A better option now or for the next package will be to request a dedicated file with the license to upstream developer. 5- To my mind BuildRequires: python3-setuptools is not required. 6- Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/lib/python3.4/site- packages/__pycache__(python3-setuptools, python3-pytest, python3-six, python3-libs) Refine %files to use %{python3_sitelib}/__pycache__/pyjf3.* and %{python3_sitelib}/pyjf3* in %files to avoid that. -- 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