https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2121797
--- Comment #3 from Ben Beasley code@musicinmybrain.net --- Thank you for the review!
(In reply to Maxwell G from comment #2)
- We usually don't package .post releases, but all this does is change some
metadata[1]. This is fine with me. [1]: https://github.com/pganssle/pytz-deprecation-shim/compare/0.1.0...0.1.0.post...
Acknowledged.
- I am not familiar with building sphinx doc PDFs, but I don't see anything
glaringly wrong.
# pyproject-rpm-macros takes care of the LICENSE file in dist-info; we manually # include the file with the full license text as well %license licenses/LICENSE_APACHE `` - I would also install the main LICENSE to the central directory. It seems silly to have one license file in one directory and the other one in a completely different directory.
In this unusual case where there are two “license” files but only one is properly handled by setuptools/wheel (and therefore by pyproject-rpm-macros), that seems reasonable. I will make the change you suggested.
- Why not put README.rst, CHANGELOG.rst (doesn't seem to be packaged at
all), and the single docs PDF in the main subpackage? I don't think it's worth having a doc subpackage for just one extra file.
The omission of CHANGELOG.rst is an error, which I will correct.
The PDF isn’t big on an absolute scale by modern standards, but the thing is that the library package is tiny. The -doc subpackage RPM is seven times as large as the library package, and still takes almost twice as much space uncompressed and installed. I’d rather drop the Sphinx/PDF documentation instead of bloating the library package by such a large factor.
-----
Updated submission: Spec URL: https://music.fedorapeople.org/20221024/python-pytz-deprecation-shim.spec SRPM URL: https://music.fedorapeople.org/20221024/python-pytz-deprecation-shim-0.1.0.p...