On 08/18/2016 09:04 AM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 17.8.2016 19:04, Nick Coghlan wrote:
[...]
>>
>> Nice! Would it make sense for us to have a "tox" section in the
>> sidebar at
>>
https://developer.fedoraproject.org/tech/languages/python/python-installa...
>>
>>
>> that covers using these COPR builds with tox for cross-version
>> testing?
>
> It would. My long term plan here actually is to put this in Fedora
> proper and make tox Recommend all the Pythons, so you could just dnf
> install tox and it would bring all the runtimes (and you could prevent
> it if you didn't want (actually I have no idea if we ahve some
> --without-recommends flag for dnf, but anyway...)).
As a note to anyone interested in alternate versions: The Guidelines
were recently changed, so the Fedora review should be easier than expected.
I find the new wording ambiguous, so I'd like to follow as much of the
process as practical, but it should prevent an eager reviewer from
nitpicking 10-year-old specfile warts in python-2.6. I'd rather focus
spec cleanup efforts on python3 ;)
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: [Guidelines change] Changes to the packaging guidelines
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 13:25:15 -0500
From: Jason L Tibbitts III <tibbs(a)math.uh.edu>
Reply-To: devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To: devel-announce(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Here are the recent changes to the packaging guidelines.
[...]
The review process document has been amended to note possible
exceptions, and to indicate that review is not needed in certain
situations where a different version of an existing package is being
added.
*
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines#Package_Review_...
*
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/637