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=668588 Steve Traylen <steve.traylen(a)cern.ch&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |662753 -- 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.

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=668588 Andrew Elwell <andrew.elwell(a)gmail.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |andrew.elwell(a)gmail.com --- Comment #2 from Andrew Elwell <andrew.elwell(a)gmail.com&gt; 2011-01-12 09:15:54 EST --- Informal review (as I'm still awaiting sponsorship): MUST Items: * rpmlint [aelwell@pcitgtelwell pil]$ rpmlint python26-imaging* python26-imaging.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US devel -> delve, devil, revel python26-imaging.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US tk -> kt, t, k 1 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. -- false warning. OK OK - Package named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. -- hard coded python version is there for an explained reason OK - Spec file in the format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption. WARN - The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. -- "All patches should have an upstream bug link or comment" -- they don't (but it's only a SHOULD) OK - Package licensed with a Fedora approved license. OK - License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. OK (it's in the README) - If source includes the text of the license(s) package it in %{doc}. OK - The spec file must be written in American English. OK - The spec file for the package MUST be legible. OK (fc14a54e1ce02a0225be8854bfba478e) - The sources must match the upstream source URL md5sum. OK (tested on RHEL5 + EPEL python26) - Package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms - unsucessful compile, build or work on an architecture should be listed ExcludeArch. -- each ExcludeArch has corresponding bugzilla no in comment adjacent. OK - Build dependencies listed in BuildRequires. OK - Spec file using the %find_lang macro for locales (not using %{_datadir}/locale/*). OK - If shared library files (not just symlinks), call ldconfig in %post and %postun. OK - Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries. OK - if relocatable, must be stared with rationalization -- without this use of Prefix: /usr is considered a blocker. OK - A package must own all directories that it creates, or require a package which creates that directory. OK - No duplicates in the spec file's %files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific situations)[14] OK - Permissions on files must be set properly. OK -- Executables should be set with executable permissions, for example. OK -- Every %files section must include a %defattr(...) line. OK - Each package must consistently use macros. OK - The package must contain code, or permissable content. OK - Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. OK - things in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application. OK - Header files must be in a -devel package. N/A - Static libraries must be in a -static package. N/A - If library files with a suffix (libfoo.so.1.1), then plain .so in a -devel package. OK - -devel packages need fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} OK - Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, -- these must be removed in the spec if they are built. OK - GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file, -- installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section. -- or explain why exempt in a comment in the spec file. OK - Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. OK - All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. SHOULD Items: Items below are things that the package (or reviewer) SHOULD do, but is not required to do. N/A - query upstream if the source does not include license text(s) as a separate file. NO - description and summary in spec file should contain translations, if available. N/A (awaiting sponsorship) - The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. Not Tested - The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. PARTIALLY DONE - The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. OK - If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. YES - Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. - The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends on their usecase, and this is usually for development purposes, so should be placed in a -devel pkg. A reasonable exception is that the main pkg itself is a devel tool not installed in a user runtime, e.g. gcc or gdb. [30] - If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file instead of the file itself. - your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts. If it doesn't, work with upstream to add them where they make sense. Tested on a RHEL5 (clone) box + EPEL for dependencies -- Built OK and basic functionality OK. -- 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.

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=668588 Jason Tibbitts <tibbs(a)math.uh.edu&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|Review python26-imaging - |Review Request: |Python's own image |python26-imaging - Python's |processing library |own image processing | |library -- 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.

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=668588 --- Comment #4 from Steve Traylen <steve.traylen(a)cern.ch&gt; 2011-01-26 07:28:27 EST --- Thanks for the comments, as you say the filtering of .so was never done anywhere much in RHEL/EPEL5 though it is possible to 'sed' them away. I'll leave the package as is. Steve. -- 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.

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=668588 Andrew Elwell <andrew.elwell(a)gmail.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Andrew Elwell <andrew.elwell(a)gmail.com&gt; 2011-01-26 08:59:50 EST --- OK - contents of original review (comment #2) still apply. Builds ok in mock for both 32 and 64 bit epel5: INFO: Done(python26-imaging-1.1.7-4.el5.src.rpm) Config(epel-5-x86_64) $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/epel-5-x86_64/result/python26-imaging-*64.rpm python26-imaging.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US devel -> delve, devil, revel python26-imaging.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US tk -> kt, t, k python26-imaging-tk.x86_64: W: no-documentation 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. (can be safely ignored) INFO: Done(python26-imaging-1.1.7-4.el5.src.rpm) Config(epel-5-i386) $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/epel-5-i386/result/python26-imaging-*6.rpm python26-imaging.i386: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US devel -> delve, devil, revel python26-imaging.i386: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US tk -> kt, t, k python26-imaging-tk.i386: W: no-documentation 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. (ditto) so, review OK. -- 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.

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=668588 Steve Traylen <steve.traylen(a)cern.ch&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Steve Traylen <steve.traylen(a)cern.ch&gt; 2011-01-26 10:01:00 EST --- New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: python26-imaging Short Description: Python's own image processing library Owners: stevetraylen Branches: el5 This is an EPEL5 only package so the devel branch can be closed immediately. Steve -- 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.

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=668588 Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |MODIFIED -- 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.

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=668588 Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; 2011-01-27 13:23:43 EST --- python26-imaging-1.1.7-4.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update python26-imaging'. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python26-imaging-1.1.7-4.el5 -- 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.

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=668588 Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version| |python26-imaging-1.1.7-4.el | |5 Resolution| |ERRATA Last Closed| |2011-02-12 19:20:48 -- 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.