https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1871171
--- Comment #34 from Maxwell G gotmax@e.email --- (In reply to Maxwell G from comment #29)
I'm looking at this with fresh eyes and more packaging experience, so apologizes that I'm pointing things out that I didn't before:
Consider using following the new Python Packaging Guidelines[1] and the new pyproject macros. Particularly, look at the example specfile[2]. I use this for all of my packages, except if I'm planning to branch them for epel7 and/or epel8. Note that the old macros and the old Python Packaging Guidelines[3] are still valid.
#_empty_spec_file [3]: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python_201x/
This was optional, so it's fine that you didn't implement it. I still recommend doing so, however.
# python-RPi-GPIO.spec
This seems unnecessary to me, but meh.
%global pkgname rpi-gpio2 %global pypi_name RPi.GPIO2
I do not like having all of these *name macros. They make the specfile harder to read. I'd suggest using the the the actual values in the appropriate places, instead.
Done. However, it seems the SRPM is named python-rpi-gpio2, while the python3 subpackage is named python3-RPi.GPIO2. It should also be named python3-rpi-gpio2.
%check %py3_check_import RPi # the tests rely on the presence of the actual physical GPIO pins on the system for now and though we may develop emulation functionality to run the tests on any system in the future we think the software is ready to be packaged as-is and we will just update it when the better tests are done
Please put the %check block below %install.
Fixed. Thank you.
Recommends: python-%{pkgname}-doc
I'd recommend against this. Having the main package pull in the doc subpackage kind of negates the point of having that in the first place.
Fixed. Thank you.
License: GPLv3+
Fedora now has new licensing guidelines and uses SPDX license identifiers. This should be `GPL-3.0-or-later.
Fixed. Thank you.