https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441023
Bug ID: 1441023 Summary: Review Request: python-fontmake - Compile fonts from sources to binary Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: athoscribeiro@gmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Spec URL: https://athoscr.fedorapeople.org/packaging/python-fontmake.spec SRPM URL: https://athoscr.fedorapeople.org/packaging/python-fontmake-1.2.3-1.fc25.src....
Description: This library provides a wrapper for several other Python libraries which together compile fonts from various sources (.glyphs, .ufo) into binaries (.otf, .ttf).
Fedora Account System Username:athoscr
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441023
Athos Ribeiro athoscribeiro@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends On| |1433757, 1435230, 1440992
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1433757 [Bug 1433757] Review Request: python-glyphslib - A bridge from Glyphs source files to UFOs https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1435230 [Bug 1435230] Review Request: python-ufo2ft - A bridge from UFOs to FontTool objects https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1440992 [Bug 1440992] Review Request: python-booleanOperations - Boolean operations on paths
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441023
--- Comment #1 from Athos Ribeiro athoscribeiro@gmail.com --- New sources
Spec URL: https://athoscr.fedorapeople.org/packaging/python-fontmake.spec SRPM URL: https://athoscr.fedorapeople.org/packaging/python-fontmake-1.2.6-1.fc25.src....
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441023 Bug 1441023 depends on bug 1433757, which changed state.
Bug 1433757 Summary: Review Request: python-glyphsLib - A bridge from Glyphs source files to UFOs https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1433757
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441023
Peter Oliver mavit@mavit.org.uk changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |1258542
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1258542 [Bug 1258542] Review Request: hack-fonts - A typeface designed for source code
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441023
--- Comment #2 from Shawn Starr shawn.starr@rogers.com --- I will review your packaging
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441023
--- Comment #3 from Shawn Starr shawn.starr@rogers.com --- In order for me to review this, I'll have to build the other packages that depend on this and install locally in mock.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441023 Bug 1441023 depends on bug 1435230, which changed state.
Bug 1435230 Summary: Review Request: python-ufo2ft - A bridge from UFOs to FontTool objects https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1435230
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|POST |CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441023
--- Comment #4 from Shawn Starr shawn.starr@rogers.com --- This seems blocked from other dependencies. I will review when the other dependencies are resolved.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441023
--- Comment #5 from Shawn Starr shawn.starr@rogers.com --- More dependencies are being approved, still waiting
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441023
--- Comment #6 from Athos Ribeiro athoscribeiro@gmail.com --- Yes... In special, we have BZ#1440971, which requires an older ABI of a library we do have packaged in Fedora.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441023
--- Comment #7 from Shawn Starr shawn.starr@rogers.com --- python-booleanoperations is being reviewed, this will become unblocked and I will review latest .spec provided.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441023 Bug 1441023 depends on bug 1440992, which changed state.
Bug 1440992 Summary: Review Request: python-booleanoperations - Boolean operations on paths https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1440992
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441023
--- Comment #8 from Athos Ribeiro athoscribeiro@gmail.com --- Spec URL: https://athoscr.fedorapeople.org/packaging/python-fontmake.spec SRPM URL: https://athoscr.fedorapeople.org/packaging/python-fontmake-1.4.0-1.fc27.src.... Koji build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=25216007
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441023
--- Comment #9 from Shawn Starr shawn.starr@rogers.com --- Thanks, I'll take a look at this today from a mock rawhide environment.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441023
Kalev Lember klember@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |klember@redhat.com Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |klember@redhat.com
--- Comment #10 from Kalev Lember klember@redhat.com --- Taking for review.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441023
--- Comment #11 from Kalev Lember klember@redhat.com --- Packaging looks nice and clean, but I'm wondering about the naming here. Wouldn't it be cleaner to call the source package 'fontmake' as upstream calls it, and then have 3 binary packages: fontmake, python2-fontmake, python3-fontmake? Similar to how Debian is packaging it (it has very similar python naming standards as we do): https://packages.debian.org/source/sid/fontmake
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441023
--- Comment #12 from Kalev Lember klember@redhat.com --- Ping?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441023
Rastus Vernon rastus.vernon@protonmail.ch changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |1430589
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1430589 [Bug 1430589] Version 2.000 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441023
Jamie Mansfield jamie.mansfield.jm@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jamie.mansfield.jm@gmail.co | |m
--- Comment #13 from Jamie Mansfield jamie.mansfield.jm@gmail.com --- Naming the package 'fontmake' makes sense (and still satisfies the Python packaging guidelines - 1).
Though, given the impending deprecation of python2, should there really be a python2- package? The guidelines seem to suggest that python2 packages can only be introduced by special exemption (2), though perhaps that means for libraries/applications that exclusively run on python2.
[1]: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python?rd=Packaging/Python#Naming [2]: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python?rd=Packaging/Python#Python_V...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1441023
Parag AN(पराग) panemade@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |athoscribeiro@gmail.com, | |panemade@gmail.com Flags| |needinfo?(athoscribeiro@gma | |il.com)
--- Comment #14 from Parag AN(पराग) panemade@gmail.com --- Adding Needinfo on Reporter. If there is no reply from the reporter in next seven days let's close this and create a fresh package request by someone.
If reporter comes back sometime later, we can add him as a co-maintainer if he needed.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org