https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1268090
Bug ID: 1268090 Summary: Review Request: python-requests-mock - Mock out responses from the requests package Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: williamjmorenor@gmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Spec URL: https://williamjmorenor.fedorapeople.org/rpmdev/python-requests-mock.spec SRPM URL: https://williamjmorenor.fedorapeople.org/rpmdev/python-requests-mock-0.6.0-1... Description: Mock out responses from the requests package Fedora Account System Username: williamjmorenor
Rawhide Build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11297109
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1268090
William Moreno williamjmorenor@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |1268093
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1268093 [Bug 1268093] Review Request: python-geoip2 - MaxMind GeoIP2 API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1268090
William Moreno williamjmorenor@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks|1268093 |
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1268093 [Bug 1268093] Review Request: python-geoip2 - MaxMind GeoIP2 API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1268090
Randy Barlow rbarlow@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |rbarlow@redhat.com
--- Comment #1 from Randy Barlow rbarlow@redhat.com --- Hi William! I am also seeking to become a maintainer, so this review is informal only. Here are a few notes that I have for you:
0) It is conventional to name Python 2 packages with a python- prefix and Python 3 packages with a python3- prefix, but this package uses python2- instead of python. You will probably be required to fix that.
1) Is this package only intended to support EPEL >= 7 and Fedora? If so that is fine but if not you may need some macros to make sure the Python 3 blocks only execute on systems that support Python 3.
2) You've repeated the description three times. I believe it is possible to only write it once at the top, since the two packages share the same description. I believe this holds for the summary as well.
3) You've commented out the lines in your check section. You probably should include those lines unless the tests don't pass in the upstream project. If they do not pass, I recommend removing the commented code for cleanliness.
4) Sometimes the information provided in the egg.info files can be important for certain packages, particularly if Python entry points are used. You may want to leave that in instead of removing it, but it depends on the package.
Looks good, good luck!
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1268090
Richard Shaw hobbes1069@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |hobbes1069@gmail.com
--- Comment #2 from Richard Shaw hobbes1069@gmail.com --- (In reply to Randy Barlow from comment #1)
- Sometimes the information provided in the egg.info files can be important
for certain packages, particularly if Python entry points are used. You may want to leave that in instead of removing it, but it depends on the package.
Yes, unless there is some compelling reason to remove it, the Python packaging guidelines require that the egg.info be included in the package.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1268090
Christos Triantafyllidis christos.triantafyllidis@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |christos.triantafyllidis@gm | |ail.com Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |christos.triantafyllidis@gm | |ail.com Flags| |fedora-review?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1268090
Christos Triantafyllidis christos.triantafyllidis@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |NEW Assignee|christos.triantafyllidis@gm |nobody@fedoraproject.org |ail.com | Whiteboard| |BuildFails Flags|fedora-review? |
--- Comment #3 from Christos Triantafyllidis christos.triantafyllidis@gmail.com --- Hello,
I'm afraid there are a few issues that block the review of this.
Looks like the build based on that SRPM fails: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12043662
There are missing dependencies (at least buildrequires for python(3)-pbr).
Also the source url seems to be wrong: http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/g/%%7Bsrcname%7D/%%7Bsrcname%7D-%%7Bv... The correct one should be: http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/r/%%7Bsrcname%7D/%%7Bsrcname%7D-%%7Bv...
Please fix the above and remove "BuildFails" from the whiteboard to make it re-appear to the list.
Cheers, Christos
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1268090
Eduardo Mayorga e@mayorgalinux.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |e@mayorgalinux.com
--- Comment #4 from Eduardo Mayorga e@mayorgalinux.com --- Any update?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1268090
William Moreno williamjmorenor@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |williamjmorenor@gmail.com Flags| |needinfo?(williamjmorenor@g | |mail.com)
--- Comment #5 from William Moreno williamjmorenor@gmail.com --- Hello any uodate here? If not I will need to close this ticket as a DEADREVIEW
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1268090
Robert-André Mauchin zebob.m@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |zebob.m@gmail.com Flags| |needinfo?(williamjmorenor@g | |mail.com)
--- Comment #6 from Robert-André Mauchin zebob.m@gmail.com --- (In reply to William Moreno from comment #5)
Hello any uodate here? If not I will need to close this ticket as a DEADREVIEW
Well that's your own package, if you bump the version to 1.4.0, I'll review it.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1268090
--- Comment #7 from Robert-André Mauchin zebob.m@gmail.com --- Also the summary and description looks wrong.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1268090
William Moreno williamjmorenor@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Flags|needinfo?(williamjmorenor@g | |mail.com) | |needinfo?(williamjmorenor@g | |mail.com) | Last Closed| |2018-03-16 15:59:42
--- Comment #8 from William Moreno williamjmorenor@gmail.com --- True.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org