[Bug 2299712] Review Request: uv - An extremely fast Python package installer and resolver, written in Rust

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

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2299712



--- Comment #1 from Miro Hrončok <mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx> ---
Spec sanity:

----------

This is not a Rust crate, so the name of the component is OK.

----------

The Licenses in the comment and in the License tag seem to be represented
differently. See e.g. "Zlib OR Apache-2.0 OR MIT" vs "Apache-2.0 OR MIT OR
Zlib" -- this is confusing and hard to verify.

----------

Suggestion: Number patches after sources, i.e. rename Patch100 to Patch201 and
Patch101 to Patch301 -- that way it is more obvious which potch goes where (and
possibly also %autopatch could be used, with ranges, but I have not tried that
from subdirectories).

----------

> # Downstream-only: do not override the default allocator

It is not obvious why this is needed. The comment rather says we might want to
drop it. I assume this is to avoid an unpackaged dependency... ?

----------

>  • ⚖️  Drop-in replacement for common pip, pip-tools, and virtualenv commands.
>  • ⁉️  Best-in-class error messages with a conflict-tracking resolver.

Those two bullet points have double spaces after the emoji.

----------

> %package -n python3-uv
> Summary:        %{summary}

This subpackage should have a different summary.

----------

> %if 0%{?__isa_bits} == 32

Have you considered excluding i686 from the start? This should be a leaf
package except for hatch which is noarch.

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/EncourageI686LeafRemoval

----------

The %prep section is a monstrosity, but it was surprisingly easy to follow. The
comments are very helpful, thanks.

----------

> export RUSTFLAGS='%{build_rustflags}'

This should be part of %set_build_flags, is it actually needed?

----------

> # -p uv-auth --lib:

I got a bit confused by this comment in %check. What does it relate to?


-- 
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=2299712

Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202299712%23c1

-- 
_______________________________________________
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




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

  Powered by Linux