[Bug 1667718] Review Request: python2-jsonschema - JSON Schema validation implementation for Python

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

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1667718



--- Comment #1 from Miro Hrončok <mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx> ---
1. Note that there is also python2-backports-functools_lru_cache which IMHO
makes more sense than using python2-repoze-lru. However both packages are still
needed by stuff in Fedora so switching to one or another won't unblock the
remaining one, so this is not important.

2. Are the RHEL6 conditionals worth it? Will the package even build on RHEL6?
Are we planning to change anything in EPEL6 about this? I hope we are not.


3. The manual "Requires: python2-repoze-lru" is not needed, the patch patches
setup.py and hence the package requires python2.7dist(repoze.lru).

4. Is %{_bindir}/jsonschema-2 needed? Can we not ship it and only consider this
a compat library package?

5. I suggest to use %{python2_sitelib}/%{pypi_name}-%{version}-py?.?.egg-info/
with the leading slash so no surprises happen if it happens to be a directory. 

6. setup.py uses setuptools, BR python2-setuptools explicitly (the transitive
dependency can go away in the future, see python2.spec for details).


Everything else looks good.

Note A: Depends on deprecated python2 but is a rename, so ti si allowed.

Note B: It is a rename, but no binary package rename, so no new
provides/obsoletes are needed.


CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     :
6ff5f3180870836cae40f06fa10419f557208175f13ad7bc26caa77beb1f6e02
CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package :
6ff5f3180870836cae40f06fa10419f557208175f13ad7bc26caa77beb1f6e02


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: python2-jsonschema-2.6.0-7.fc30.noarch.rpm
          python2-jsonschema-2.6.0-7.fc30.src.rpm
python2-jsonschema.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US validator ->
lavatorial
python2-jsonschema.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jsonschema-2
python2-jsonschema.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US validator ->
lavatorial
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.

Good.

-- 
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
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite Conditions]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux