https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1240116
--- Comment #5 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek(a)in.waw.pl> ---
(In reply to Javier Peña from comment #4)
- I think it might be better to fetch the source code directly from
GitHub
or PyPi. I have been doing some tests using
https://pypi.python.org/packages/source/m/%{pypi_name}/%{pypi_name}-
%{version}.tar.gz and it works fine for me (with some details, see below).
Pff, the
situation is more complicated than that.
I forgot to update the comment to describe how the tarball was generated.
I made a pull request (
https://github.com/cuthbertLab/music21/pull/100) and
update the comments in the spec file.
- At least on the PyPi source, license is included in a license.txt
file
together with the sources, so you can use "%license
%{python2_sitelib}/music21/license.txt" with it.
- I see the sources include some external libraries in music.ext, and your
spec file patches them manually using sed to avoid library bundling. Is
there any open request upstream to avoid this?
I haven't submitted my patches
upstream yet. It would be nice if upstream
refactored the code to try to import external modules first, before falling
back to the bundled ones, so that unbundling could be done transparently...
I wanted to wait until the review before I submit stuff upstream, in case
other issues are found.
- rpmlint complains twice about macro-in-comment, and mixed spaces
and tabs
in line 29.
Fixed!
Please be aware that this is an informal review.
Thanks for the
comments.
Spec URL:
http://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/python-music21.spec
SRPM URL:
http://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/python-music21-2.0.5-2.fc23.src.rpm
--
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