https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2235080
Sandro <gui1ty(a)penguinpee.nl> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
|needinfo?(gui1ty@penguinpee |
|.nl) |
Status|ASSIGNED |POST
--- Comment #7 from Sandro <gui1ty(a)penguinpee.nl> ---
=> The license file is already included and marked as such by
`%pyproject_save_files`. Using `%license` in addition duplicates the file, see `rpm -q
--licensefiles -p $RPM`.
That has not been fixed. The license file is still duplicated. You can drop
%license from the %files section (not a blocker, though).
Other than that this looks good now. Thanks for adding the comment. Regarding
the version, you are most likely encountering the use of dynamic version
detection by looking at tags.
Instead of:
%generate_buildrequires
# Fix issue about "versioning for this project requires either an sdist
tarball,
# or access to an upstream git repository. It's also possible that there is a
# mismatch between the package name in setup.cfg and the argument given
# to pbr.version.VersionInfo."
export PBR_VERSION=%{version}
%pyproject_buildrequires
you could try:
BuildRequires: git-core
...
%prep
%forgeautosetup -p1 -S git
git tag %{version} # if upstream uses vX.Y.Z make it v%{version}
%generate_buildrequires
%pyproject_buildrequires
But that's just a general idea from experience. I haven't looked at upstreams
code nor have I tried it myself.
APPROVED! (bonus points for using forge macros!) ;)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2235080
Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...