https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2003700
--- Comment #5 from Michal Schorm <mschorm(a)redhat.com> ---
Fedora Packaging Guidelines (NOT Python specific) findings:
11/ Man page installation
Please consider using an alternative approach of packing the man page.
Go through:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_documentation
And take a look if the '%_pkgdocdir' macro won't help you.
If nothing in that section would enhance your approach, I'm fine with the
current code.
12/ LICENSE file
I do not see any usage of '%license' macro in the '%files' section,
however
the License file is present in the package:
python3-container-workflow-tool-1.0.0-1.fc36.noarch.rpm/usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/container_workflow_tool-1.0.0.dist-info/LICENSE
13/ Configuration files
I can see the YAML config files in the
| python3-container-workflow-tool-1.0.0-1.fc36.noarch.rpm
| └── usr
| └── lib
| └── python3.10
| └── site-packages
| └── container_workflow_tool
| ├── cli_common.py
| ├── cli.py
| └── config
| ├── default.yaml
| ├── f27.yaml
| ├── f28.yaml
| ├── f29.yaml
| ├── f30.yaml
| ├── f31.yaml
| ├── f32.yaml
| ├── f33.yaml
| ├── f34.yaml
| ├── rawhide.yaml
| └── share
| ├── cwt_config.yaml
| └── urls.yaml
As per:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_configuration...
The configuration files MUST be marked as such.
But also:
"/usr is deemed to not contain configuration files in Fedora."
And I haven't found any exception in the Python-specific guidelines.
[NEED-2ND-OPINION] Can we get a guidance from a Python packaging expert?
--
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=2003700