[Bug 513775] Review Request: pyfuzzy - Python framework for fuzzy sets

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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=513775





--- Comment #2 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs at math.uh.edu>  2009-07-29 20:24:40 EDT ---
Well, the name is correct according to the guidelines.  The upstream project is
'pyfuzzy', the tarball is 'pyfuzy', and it has 'py' in the name so no 'python-'
prefix is necessary.  'python-fuzzy', on the other hand, would be against the
guidelines.  Perl at least has this handled with the 'perl(Foo::Bar)' automatic
dependencies.

Also, GPL and GPL+ are not the same thing, as the author could choose not to
use the "any later version" option.  Of course, they didn't actually specify
anything but "GPL" in one place, but Fabian has already requested that upstream
fix that up so in the meantime we assume GPL+.  Of course, upstream seems to be
completely idle for the past six years, so...

There's a test suite.  You can call the individual tests with:
  %check
  cd test
  export PYTHONPATH=%{buildroot}/%{python_sitelib}
  ./test_defuzzyfication.py
  ./test_merge.py
  ./test_norm.py
  ./test_set.py
(or you could use a loop or something).  However, only test_defuzzyfication
seems to work.  It looks like there may be an issue with outdated python
syntax.  Could you double-check?  If the module has issues with python 2.6 then
it would be better to know that up front instead of after it gets imported and
built.


* source files match upstream.  sha256sum:            
   c3cc76ad5283e38b540db29b1cb56fff671fbe0d94a2808fa219896833f5a417
   pyfuzzy-0.0.2.tar.gz
* package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* summary is OK.                                                              
* description is OK.                                                          
* dist tag is present.
* build root is OK.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text not included upstream.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64).
* package installs properly.
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane:
   pyfuzzy = 0.0.2-1.fc12
  =
   gnuplot
   python(abi) = 2.6

? %check is not present, but there seem to be some tests.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no generically named files
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.


The package review process needs reviewers!  If you haven't done any package
reviews recently, please consider doing one.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.