Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: python-ssl - SSL wrapper for socket objects (2.3, 2.4, 2.5 compatible)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=527049
Summary: Review Request: python-ssl - SSL wrapper for socket objects (2.3, 2.4, 2.5 compatible) Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: steve.traylen@cern.ch QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora
This will never build on current and recent fedora where Python 2.6 is present It will only be released and should only be tested for EPEL4 and EPEL5.
Spec URL: http://cern.ch/straylen/rpms/python-ssl/python-ssl.spec SRPM URL: http://cern.ch/straylen/rpms/python-ssl/python-ssl-1.15-1.el5.src.rpm Description: SSL wrapper for socket objects (2.3, 2.4, 2.5 compatible)
The old socket.ssl() support for TLS over sockets is being superseded in Python 2.6 by a new 'ssl' module. This package brings that module to older Python releases.
$ rpmlint python-ssl.spec \ ../SRPMS/python-ssl-1.15-1.el5.src.rpm \ /var/lib/mock/epel-5-x86_64/result/python-ssl-1.15-1.el5.x86_64.rpm 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
EPEL 4 & 5 builds. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1725937 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1725941
I realize this will need some handling when EPEL6 arrives one day.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=527049
Matt Domsch matt_domsch@dell.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |matt_domsch@dell.com
--- Comment #1 from Matt Domsch matt_domsch@dell.com 2009-10-13 10:44:46 EDT --- I'll take the review.
Missing a license file in %doc. Not strictly required as the upstream tarball doesn't have it, but would be nice to add.
Group: tag can arguably be "Development/Libraries" and not "Development/Languages".
Use of 'cp' in %install should use 'cp -p' to preserve file timestamps.
rpmlint is clean. $ rpmlint SPECS/python-ssl.spec RPMS/x86_64/python-ssl-1.15-1.fc10.x86_64.rpm SRPMS/python-ssl-1.15-1.fc10.src.rpm 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
Name: OK spec name: OK packaging guidelines: ok license: ok license field: ok license text file: not present in upstream. ok. english spec: ok legible spec: ok sources match upstream: ok $ sha1sum ssl-1.15.tar.gz SOURCES/ssl-1.15.tar.gz 18035755a0ab75fe23191b5588d4572bfe675b5c ssl-1.15.tar.gz 18035755a0ab75fe23191b5588d4572bfe675b5c SOURCES/ssl-1.15.tar.gz
builds on x86_64: ok doesn't build on some arch: unknown, nothing indicated. ok. buildrequires: ok locales: not used, ok. shared libs: none. ok no system libs: ok relocatable: no. ok. own dirs: ok no duplicate files: ok file perms: ok clean section: ok consistent use of macros: ok code not content: code. ok large docs: none. ok. runtime docs: no. ok. header files: none. ok static libs: none. ok pkgconfig: none. ok devel versioned dep: none. ok. no .la: none. ok desktop file: none. ok dir ownership: ok install rm-rf: ok utf8: ok
SHOULDs: license: noted above translated description: not available builds in mock: yes, koji builds linked above builds for target arches: yes via koji above tested: not done during review scriptlets sane: none, ok. subpackages: none, ok pkgconfig: none, ok file deps: none, ok
With minor modifications above, this is a clean package, thanks. Please make suggested changes and I'll approve.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=527049
Matt Domsch matt_domsch@dell.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-review?
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=527049
Matt Domsch matt_domsch@dell.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |matt_domsch@dell.com
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=527049
--- Comment #2 from Steve Traylen steve.traylen@cern.ch 2009-10-13 14:32:09 EDT --- Hi Matt, New ones here:
http://cern.ch/straylen/rpms/python-ssl/python-ssl-1.15-2.el5.src.rpm http://cern.ch/straylen/rpms/python-ssl/python-ssl.spec
Changes include addition of a -p on the cp. The group has changed to what you suggested which I agree is better.
Finally I have sent a mail upstream requesting the addition of a LICENSE file.
rpmlint is still clean.
I will of course once this gets to the testing phase submit a bug to RHEL python in anticipation of RHEL6. It seems there are similar bugs like python-uulit bug #484708 which is exactly the same kind of thing.
Steve
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=527049
Matt Domsch matt_domsch@dell.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Matt Domsch matt_domsch@dell.com 2009-10-13 14:51:46 EDT --- Good job. APPROVED.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=527049
Steve Traylen steve.traylen@cern.ch changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #4 from Steve Traylen steve.traylen@cern.ch 2009-10-13 15:39:04 EDT --- New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: python-ssl Short Description: SSL wrapper for socket objects (2.3, 2.4, 2.5 compatible) Owners: stevetraylen Branches: EL-4 EL-5 InitialCC:
Only odd since this is a strictly less than python 2.6 and so only EPEL 4 and 5.
Steve
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=527049
Kevin Fenzi kevin@tummy.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+
--- Comment #5 from Kevin Fenzi kevin@tummy.com 2009-10-15 13:20:05 EDT --- You always get a devel branch. You can however, mark it a dead.package in devel and ask rel-eng to block it there. (See the package end of life page on the wiki).
cvs done.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=527049
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2009-10-15 16:11:13 EDT --- python-ssl-1.15-3.el4 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 4. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-ssl-1.15-3.el4
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=527049
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2009-10-15 16:16:47 EDT --- python-ssl-1.15-3.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-ssl-1.15-3.el5
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=527049
Steve Traylen steve.traylen@cern.ch changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE
--- Comment #8 from Steve Traylen steve.traylen@cern.ch 2009-10-15 16:29:09 EDT --- Request has now been made on RHEL6 python to obsolete this package. bug #529274
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=527049
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2009-11-05 16:26:08 EDT --- python-ssl-1.15-3.el4 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 4 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=527049
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2009-11-05 16:26:56 EDT --- python-ssl-1.15-3.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org