https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1312408 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |POST Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> --- + latest version + license is acceptable (BSD) + license file is present, %license is used + provides/requires look OK + python_provide is present + no scriptlets present or necessary + %check is present, tests pass Package is APPROVED. That said, let me return to the question of separate build dirs: people used to do that, because it made sense with 2to3. But fortunately we've mostly gotten rid of that, and "building" is just a step of copying a few files to build/. I just checked with 'diff -r /usr/share/doc/python2-sphinx-testing /usr/share/doc/python3-sphinx-testing' and '/usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/sphinx_testing /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/sphinx_testing', and there's no difference apart from the .py[co] files. Upstream Python now supports using the same source for 2.7 and 3.x much better than it used to, and it also supports using the same dir for *binary* files thanks to the version specific extensions. Fedora guidelines don't recommend using separate build directories any more. So creating a separate build dir just makes everything more complicated for no good reason. If you *prefer* to do it this way, that's OK, but I still think it's unnecessary. -- 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