https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2000931 Miro Hrončok <mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-review+ Assignee|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx Status|NEW |POST CC| |mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx --- Comment #2 from Miro Hrončok <mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx> --- A suggested description slightly adapted from https://crates.io/crates/python-launcher ============================================= The Python Launcher for Unix. Launch your Python interpreter the lazy/smart way! This launcher is an implementation of the py command for Unix-based platforms. The goal is to have py become the cross-platform command that Python users typically use to launch an interpreter while doing development. By having a command that is version-agnostic when it comes to Python, it side-steps the "what should the python command point to?" debate by clearly specifying that upfront (i.e. the newest version of Python that can be found). This also unifies the suggested command to document for launching Python on both Windows as Unix as py has existed as the preferred command on Windows since 2012 with the release of Python 3.3. Typical usage would be: py -m venv .venv py ... # Whatever you would normally use `python` for during development. This creates a virtual environment in a .venv directory using the latest version of Python installed. Subsequent uses of py will then use that virtual environment as long as it is in the current (or higher) directory; no environment activation required (although the Python Launcher supports activated environments as well)! A non-goal of this launcher is to become the way to launch the Python interpreter all the time. If you know the exact interpreter you want to launch then you should launch it directly; same goes for when you have requirements on the type of interpreter you want. The Python Launcher should be viewed as a tool of convenience, not necessity. ============================================= Also, we might want to install the Shell completions for fish. Other than that, the package is APPROVED. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated ===== MUST items ===== Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "Expat License". [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [-]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 40960 bytes in 4 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %license. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package does not use a name that already exists. [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream publishes signatures. Note: gpgverify is not used. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [?]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: python-launcher-1.0.0-1.fc36.x86_64.rpm rust-python-launcher-devel-1.0.0-1.fc36.noarch.rpm rust-python-launcher+default-devel-1.0.0-1.fc36.noarch.rpm rust-python-launcher-debugsource-1.0.0-1.fc36.x86_64.rpm rust-python-launcher-1.0.0-1.fc36.src.rpm python-launcher.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: https://crates.io/crates/python-launcher HTTP Error 404: Not Found rust-python-launcher-devel.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://crates.io/crates/python-launcher HTTP Error 404: Not Found rust-python-launcher-devel.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/cargo/registry/python-launcher-1.0.0/.cargo-checksum.json rust-python-launcher+default-devel.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://crates.io/crates/python-launcher HTTP Error 404: Not Found rust-python-launcher+default-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation rust-python-launcher-debugsource.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: https://crates.io/crates/python-launcher HTTP Error 404: Not Found rust-python-launcher.src: W: invalid-url URL: https://crates.io/crates/python-launcher HTTP Error 404: Not Found 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings. Source checksums ---------------- https://crates.io/api/v1/crates/python-launcher/1.0.0/download#/python-launcher-1.0.0.crate : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 127de0c134fb2b1e470162b125e0e51b2cfde029f70b923e0344b70d9510b8f6 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 127de0c134fb2b1e470162b125e0e51b2cfde029f70b923e0344b70d9510b8f6 Requires -------- python-launcher (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): ld-linux-x86-64.so.2()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_4.2.0)(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) rust-python-launcher-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): (crate(comfy-table/default) >= 4.0.1 with crate(comfy-table/default) < 5.0.0~) (crate(exitcode/default) >= 1.1.2 with crate(exitcode/default) < 2.0.0~) (crate(human-panic/default) >= 1.0.3 with crate(human-panic/default) < 2.0.0~) (crate(log/default) >= 0.4.14 with crate(log/default) < 0.5.0~) (crate(nix/default) >= 0.22.0 with crate(nix/default) < 0.23.0~) (crate(stderrlog/default) >= 0.5.1 with crate(stderrlog/default) < 0.6.0~) cargo rust-python-launcher+default-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): cargo crate(python-launcher) rust-python-launcher-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- python-launcher: py py(x86-64) python-launcher python-launcher(x86-64) rust-python-launcher-devel: crate(python-launcher) rust-python-launcher-devel rust-python-launcher+default-devel: crate(python-launcher/default) rust-python-launcher+default-devel rust-python-launcher-debugsource: rust-python-launcher-debugsource rust-python-launcher-debugsource(x86-64) Generated by fedora-review 0.7.0 (fed5495) last change: 2019-03-17 Command line :try-fedora-review -b 2000931 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 --mock-options=--enablerepo=local Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Shell-api, Generic Disabled plugins: Python, Haskell, Perl, SugarActivity, fonts, C/C++, PHP, Ocaml, Java, R, Ruby Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
