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-pika - AMQP client library for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=639652
Summary: Review Request: python-pika - AMQP client library for Python Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ilia.cheishvili@gmail.com QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: http://github.com/icheishvili/rpms/raw/master//python-pika.spec SRPM URL: http://github.com/icheishvili/rpms/raw/master//python-pika-0.5.2-1.fc13.src.... Description: This is an AMQP 0-8/0-9-1 client library for Python. I am hoping to get it included in Extras.
Pika is a pure-Python implementation of the AMQP 0-8 protocol (with an 0-9-1 implementation on a separate git branch, for now) that tries to stay fairly independent of the underlying network support library. It also tries to stay neutral as to programming style, supporting (where possible) both synchronous and asynchronous approaches.
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=639652
Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |lemenkov@gmail.com AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |lemenkov@gmail.com Flag| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com 2010-10-03 04:10:45 EDT --- Another one valuable addition to Fedora, indeed. I'll review it.
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=639652
--- Comment #2 from Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com 2010-10-04 10:06:51 EDT --- Preliminary notes: - this package should be marked as noarch instead of adding "%define debug_package %{nil}". Just add "BuildArch: noarch" to the head og the spec. See this spec-file for example: http://bit.ly/aN9QJ8 - there is one missing BuildRequires: python-devel - Correct License tag is "MPLv1.1 or GPLv2"
Please fix these issues, and I'll continue.
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=639652
--- Comment #3 from Ilia Cheishvili ilia.cheishvili@gmail.com 2010-10-04 12:10:41 EDT --- The build arch thing was pretty obvious, I'm surprised I missed that. Everything you mentioned is now updated in the SPEC and SRPM files.
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=639652
Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com 2010-10-04 12:49:04 EDT --- Koji scratch build for F-14: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2511242
REVIEW:
Legend: + = PASSED, - = FAILED, 0 = Not Applicable
+ rpmlint is silent
Sulaco ~: rpmlint ~/Desktop/python-pika-0.5.2-1.fc14.noarch.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Sulaco ~:
+ The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. + The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. + The package meets the Packaging Guidelines. + The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the Licensing Guidelines. + The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. + The file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package, is included in %doc. + The spec file is written in American English. + The spec file for the package is legible. + The sources used to build the package, match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL.
Sulaco ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES: sha256sum tonyg-pika-v0.5.2-0-gba01f9e.tar.gz* c5382e45c0093c2396f3d2f58b1aaddc386dc3e7ed44510e83f81fb8e51247f1 tonyg-pika-v0.5.2-0-gba01f9e.tar.gz c5382e45c0093c2396f3d2f58b1aaddc386dc3e7ed44510e83f81fb8e51247f1 tonyg-pika-v0.5.2-0-gba01f9e.tar.gz.1 Sulaco ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES:
+ The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. + All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires. 0 No need to handle locales. 0 No shared library files. + The package does NOT bundle copies of system libraries. + The package is not designed to be relocatable. + The package owns all directories that it creates. + The package does not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files listings. + Permissions on files are set properly. + The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). + The package consistently uses macros. + The package contains code, or permissible content. 0 No extremely large documentation files. + Anything, the package includes as %doc, does not affect the runtime of the application. 0 No header files. 0 No static libraries. 0 No pkgconfig(.pc) files. 0 The package doesn't contain library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1). 0 No devel sub-package. + The package does NOT contain any .la libtool archives. 0 Not a GUI application. + The package does not own files or directories already owned by other packages. + At the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). + All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8.
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=639652
--- Comment #5 from Ilia Cheishvili ilia.cheishvili@gmail.com 2010-10-04 15:32:53 EDT --- New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: python-pika Short Description: AMQP client library for Python Owners: icheishvili Branches: f14 InitialCC:
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=639652
Ilia Cheishvili ilia.cheishvili@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs?
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=639652
--- Comment #6 from Jason Tibbitts tibbs@math.uh.edu 2010-10-05 09:25:53 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests).
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=639652
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |MODIFIED
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=639652
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2010-10-06 00:47:53 EDT --- python-pika-0.5.2-1.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-pika-0.5.2-1.fc14
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=639652
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA
--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2010-10-07 15:54:31 EDT --- python-pika-0.5.2-1.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update python-pika'. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-pika-0.5.2-1.fc14
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=639652
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2010-10-18 01:41:39 EDT --- python-pika-0.5.2-1.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 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=639652
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version| |python-pika-0.5.2-1.fc14 Resolution| |ERRATA Last Closed| |2010-10-18 01:41:45
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=639652
--- Comment #10 from Ilia Cheishvili ilia.cheishvili@gmail.com 2010-10-20 02:16:54 EDT --- Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: python-pika New Branches: el5 el6 Owners: icheishvili
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=639652
Ilia Cheishvili ilia.cheishvili@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs?
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=639652
--- Comment #11 from Kevin Fenzi kevin@tummy.com 2010-10-21 09:28:32 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests).
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org