https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2112474 --- Comment #13 from Kashyap Chamarthy <kchamart@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Thanks for the v2; some comments: (1) For `gpgverify`, Alfredo pointed to an example[a] from OpenStack: %{gpgverify} --keyring=%{SOURCE102} --signature=%{SOURCE101} --data=%{SOURCE0} Where: Source0: https://tarballs.openstack.org/%{pypi_name}/%{pypi_name}-%{upstream_version}.tar.gz Source101: https://tarballs.openstack.org/%{pypi_name}/%{pypi_name}-%{upstream_version}.tar.gz.asc Source102: https://releases.openstack.org/_static/%{sources_gpg_sign}.txt Perhaps we could borrow the same approach. @John: As upstream maintainer you need to provide the keyring and signature. [a] https://github.com/rdo-packages/oslo-cache-distgit/blob/rpm-master/python-oslo-cache.spec (2) On the "pypi_name" and "pkg_name" macros, FWIW, I personally prefer them as it feels clearer to define them in one place. (I find it distracting to see a dot one time and a dash another occurence while reading the RPM spec.) (3) `rpmlint` still whines about: $> rpmlint python-qemu-qmp.spec ../SRPMS/python-qemu-qmp-0.0.1-1.fc36.src.rpm ../RPMS/noarch/python3-qemu-qmp-* [...] python3-qemu-qmp.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary qmp-shell python3-qemu-qmp.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary qmp-shell-wrap python3-qemu-qmp.noarch: W: invalid-license GPL-2.0-only python3-qemu-qmp.noarch: W: invalid-license LGPL-2.0-or-later python3-qemu-qmp-doc.noarch: W: invalid-license GPL-2.0-only python3-qemu-qmp-doc.noarch: W: invalid-license LGPL-2.0-or-later python-qemu-qmp.src: W: invalid-license GPL-2.0-only python-qemu-qmp.src: W: invalid-license LGPL-2.0-or-later I think your licensing comment in the spec is fine to address the warning. (4) The man-page for CLI scripts -- I didn't see that before either. I hope it's not too much work to convince Sphinx about it :-) (5) For %check, John is working with the upstream Avocado developers to get the 92.x version packaged. -- 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2112474 _______________________________________________ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
