[Bug 476600] Review Request: python-ZODB3 - Zope Object Database: Object Database and Persistence

[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=476600


Mads Kiilerich <mads at kiilerich.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |mads at kiilerich.com




--- Comment #1 from Mads Kiilerich <mads at kiilerich.com>  2009-10-27 20:50:16 EDT ---
An informal walkthrough of the spec file from a wannabee-packager:

Mock build fails.

Why group Development/Languages when it isn't a language? I would assume
Development/Libraries would fit better.

URL should point to a version-independent site, I guess that it should be
http://pypi.python.org/pypi/ZODB3/ instead.

Unused BuildRequires should not just be commented out. Remove them if they are
invalid.

The packages for python-zope-proxy and python-zdaemon are not available in
rawhide, so this package can't be properly reviewed yet.

Source should not be modified in %prep; it is a kind of build process and
belongs in %build. Has this problem with invalid hash-bangs been filed and
discussed upstream?

I am not familiar with CFLAGS combined with setup.py. I assume that the right
flags from python-devel is used automatically. I think the python-numeric
package is similar to this one in many ways, and even though it does many
things wrong it can perhaps be used for reference: It do not list CFLAGS. Can
you reference any documentation or prior art from other packages?

The mv code in %install seems overly complex and clever. 
Couldn't it be written as
  mv
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_bindir}/{fsdump,fsoids,fsrefs,fstail,mkzeoinst,repozo,runzeo,zeoctl,zeopack,zeopasswd}
\
    $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libexecdir}/%{name}/
or just
  mv $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_bindir}/* $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libexecdir}/%{name}/
?

A %check section should either be there or not - not just contain a disabled
checkout without further comments.

When building I notice an error which should be fixed:
byte-compiling
/home/mk/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/python-ZODB3-3.9.0-0.1.a7.fc12.i386/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/ZEO/scripts/zeoserverlog.py
to zeoserverlog.pyc
SyntaxError: ('invalid syntax',
('/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/ZEO/scripts/zeoserverlog.py', 374, 6, '   
as = []\n'))

rpmlint output:
python-ZODB3.i686: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/persistent/*.[ch]
python-ZODB3.i686: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/BTrees/*.[ch]
python-ZODB3.i686: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/include/python2.6/ZODB3/*.h
3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 34 warnings.
The include files should perhaps go to a -devel package, and I guess the rest
of the files shouldn't be there at all.
/usr/include/python2.6/ZODB3 should be in a package which requires python-devel
which owns /usr/include/python2.6/

It seems like this package contains 4 quite independent python modules.
Consider putting them in independent packages: python-BTrees python-persistent
python-ZEO python-ZODB

Hmm ... this brief review ends up being longer than the spec. IMHO there are
too many issues here. The packager should have worked more with the package
before filing a review request.

-- 
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.