[Bug 237354] Review Request: python-meld3 - An HTML/XML templating system for Python
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Sun Apr 22 00:26:16 UTC 2007
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: python-meld3 - An HTML/XML templating system for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237354
------- Additional Comments From toshio at tiki-lounge.com 2007-04-21 20:26 EST -------
Created an attachment (id=153247)
--> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=153247&action=view)
Patch to build on x86_64
MD5Sum
778b2ac28cbdc3932774246791884973 python-meld3-0.6-1fc6.src.rpm
Needswork:
* Does not build on x86_64. Since the module includes a binary module, it ends
up in sitearch (%{_libdir}/python2.?/site-packages, rather than /usr/lib).
We can use the sitearch macro instead of the sitelib macro to find this.
Patch for spec file attached.
Should do:
* meld3 doesn't contain a file with the license in it. Should email the author
to add that in his next tarball.
Good:
* rpmlint output:
W: python-meld3 invalid-license ZPL
W: python-meld3 invalid-license ZPL
W: python-meld3-debuginfo invalid-license ZPL
ZPL is the Zope Public License, This is ignorable.
* Package follows package naming guidelines.
* Spec file named appropriately.
* Package licensed under the Zope Public License v2 which is FSF approved.
* Spec file is legible American English.
* Source matches upstream.
* All build requirements are listed.
* No locale files.
* Not a dynamic library.
* Not relocatable.
* Package owns all files nad directories it installs.
* Package does not own files owned by other packages.
* %files has a proper defattr line.
* Consistent use of macros.
* Code not content.
With the attached patch, this package is APPROVED.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
More information about the package-review
mailing list