[Bug 426167] Review Request: PyYAML - YAML parser and emitter for Python

[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 report.

Summary: Review Request: PyYAML - YAML parser and emitter for Python


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426167





------- Additional Comments From jeckersb at redhat.com  2008-01-02 18:21 EST -------
(In reply to comment #2)
> About the above rpmlint complaints:
> 
> The issue with executable documentation is that it has dependencies.
> (Non-executable documentation can have dependencies as well, as rpm will
> extract dependency information from perl files and such).  What you don't want
> is for documentation to force a bunch of additional dependencies that the
> package wouldn't need at all if it were installed without that documentation.
> In this case the only dependency is the Python interpreter, so that's OK, but
> if that dependency makes use of modules, then you have to watch out that future
> RPM releases don't gain enough Python dependency generation logic to figure
> those out.
> 
> Another consideration is that if the script is sufficiently useful that you
> expect users will want to run it, you should just package it as you would any
> other executable: in /usr/bin, instead of hidden under /usr/share/doc.
> 
> You should drop the manual dependency on python; rpm figures that out for
> itself in the form of the python(abi) dependency.
> 
> You also probably want to remove the comment in the %files section as that's
> just an instruction to the packager that appears in the specfile template.
> 
> Checklist:
> * source files match upstream:
>    27b69bf6f1452e8f41577646ddfe78f9528a437409927d5d543bc97d75e27a03
>    PyYAML-3.05.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 included in package.
> * latest version is being packaged.
> * BuildRequires are proper.
> * %clean is present.
> * package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64).
> * package installs properly
> * rpmlint has acceptable complaints.
> X final provides and requires:
>    PyYAML = 3.05-1.fc9
>   =
>    /usr/bin/python
> X   python >= 2.3
>    python(abi) = 2.5
> 
> * %check is not present; no test suite upstream.
> * owns the directories it creates.
> * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
> * no duplicates in %files.
> * file permissions are appropriate.
> * no scriptlets present.
> * code, not content.
> * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
> * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
> 

Thanks Jason,

I have set the example to be non-executable, now the package is rpmlint clean. 
I also removed the explicit python dependency and removed the extra comment.

New spec and srpm:

http://csee.wvu.edu/~johnny/fedora/PyYAML.spec
http://csee.wvu.edu/~johnny/fedora/PyYAML-3.05-2.fc8.src.rpm

-- 
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, or are watching someone who is.