https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1433617 --- Comment #4 from Peter Oliver <mavit@xxxxxxxxxxxx> --- Thanks for looking at this. (In reply to Yatin Karel from comment #3) > Issues: > - python2 subpackage contains Provides python3-*, it should provide python2 > binary Fixed. > - %check can be corrected as > https://github.com/amperser/proselint/issues/623 is fixed > upstream It's fixed in the development branch, but has not yet been released to a stable version. > - For consistency one BuildRequires/Requires per line. Fixed. > - Invalid souce URL The source URL seems to work for me. What trouble are you having? > If proselint binary differs in functioning in python2/python3 it would be > good you ship > both proselint-2, proselint-3 and symlink proselint with proselint-2 or > proselint-3. The functionality shouldn't differ, and I don't think anyone will reasonably require both. > - Good to use versioned packages if available: python-setuptools --> > python2-setuptools, > same is for click, future, six There is still no python2-click in Fedora 24, but I have updated the others. > - To me it looks the invalid use of Suggests and Recommends, any reason for > using them in > spec file. What is it about them that looks invalid? It seems likely to me that anyone installing the python module is likely to also want the command-line binary. > - Correct rpmlint errors I discuss in comment #1 why I believe these errors are harmless. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
