https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2112474 --- Comment #16 from John Snow <jsnow@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Maxwell G from comment #15) > (In reply to John Snow from comment #11) > > - Need man pages for CLI scripts > > I'd recommend manpages for your users, but this is not a requirement. It's a > SHOULD guideline, not a MUST. The docs are there, I just need need to cajole Sphinx into writing a manpage for it. It'd be a shame to not have them accessible in a manner that users expect, I took the time to write them. Plus, I have a little bit of time while I wait for others to help unblock me on the dependency problem I mentioned, so I might have this for my next iteration. > > > - Might need gpgverify (?) > You only need to use %gpgverify if upstream already provides signed > tarballs. You can ignore this. I'm the upstream -- There's only one non-preview release, and I did indeed sign it. I've already added this step to my working version. (As an aside; being the upstream is why I am here trying to write the specfile, as a courtesy to the other QEMU downstream packagers who will wind up needing this package as a builddep for QEMU's own %check phase. I am realizing I went a little out of order and there are other criteria I need to fulfill to become a packager and own this package, but I am working on that process. I am a little waylaid because I am moving right now, so attention has been scattered and time has been short. I'm working on it. Feel free to gently remind me if I seem to have missed something obvious -- I probably did, in the chaos.) > > > - Need to integrate tests into a check phase, but there are dep problems. > > What dependencies are missing? You should run tests if it's > possible/practical. If not, you should at least use %pyproject_check_import. > This serves as a basic smoke test by trying to import all public modules. avocado-framework v90.0 or better. We use avocado upstream (in QEMU proper) and I was asked to try using it for my Python subproject instead of the more usual pytest to help dogfood that project, as well as to not add yet-another-testing-tool to the QEMU ecosystem. I'll add the smoke test for now, but see below for more on avocado. > > One interesting piece is that the .tar.gz for the SDist on PyPI actually > > includes my .gitlab-ci.d files, one of which is licensed as GPLv2.I didn't > > really intend to distribute these files in the SDist, so I'll have to look > > into > > that. It's harmless for now, but could cause problems when I go to drop the > > remaining legacy GPLv2 code. Thought I'd mention it. > > For Fedora, the only license that really matters is the license of the > actual installed content. The License tag does not need to account for other > files in the source tarball that aren't installed. > Good to know, thanks. (I think I still want to look into how to drop them from the SDist to begin with in the future if I can, but that's something for my research list.) > > I currently rely on avocado-framework >= 90, but I suppose > > 92.x (the "LTS" release) isn't packaged for F36 yet. > > Yes, you'll have to edit the metadata to relax this requirement. I can't - I am using asyncio features that only showed up in v90, and the tests would have to be rewritten substantially to target the older version. I couldn't find a configuration that works well across both versions, it's a behavior change I am relying on. Cleber Rosa (upstream maintainer for avocado-framework) tells me that fedora:latest carries a stream wherein avocado is kept at the bleeding edge, but that a non-modular package cannot rely upon a modular one as a dep. He is working on updating the normal package from Avocado LTS 82.0 to Avocado LTS 92.0, which will unblock me here. Thanks for the feedback! My action items right now are: - Help Cleber get the avocado package updated - Publish manpages for the CLI tools that I bundle. Will likely be rectified for upstream's v0.0.2. - Work through https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Joining_the_Package_Maintainers/ -- 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. 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
