Skip to content

Fix a few issues of Fedora packaing #527

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jan 30, 2025
Merged

Fix a few issues of Fedora packaing #527

merged 3 commits into from
Jan 30, 2025

Conversation

LecrisUT
Copy link
Collaborator

@LecrisUT LecrisUT commented Sep 9, 2024

Mainly fixing license to be in SPDX format. But while on it, there are a few minor simplifications

@codecov Codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Sep 9, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 73.30%. Comparing base (dc75238) to head (30b7520).
Report is 32 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files 
@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop     #527   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    73.30%   73.30%           
========================================
  Files           26       26           
  Lines         8068     8068           
  Branches      1689     1691    +2     
========================================
  Hits          5914     5914           
  Misses        1627     1627           
  Partials       527      527
Flag Coverage Δ
c_api 68.68% <ø> (ø)
fortran_api 50.70% <ø> (ø)
python_api 64.14% <ø> (ø)
unit_tests 11.67% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@LecrisUT
Copy link
Collaborator Author

LecrisUT commented Sep 9, 2024

TODO: Review copyright and license of other files, e.g. the test data files. This is mostly to better represent SourceLicense. It is also very helpful to have a breakdown of how each files are licensed.

@LecrisUT LecrisUT self-assigned this Sep 9, 2024
@LecrisUT
Copy link
Collaborator Author

LecrisUT commented Jan 29, 2025 •
edited
Loading

@atztogo @lan496 I think I can finish this PR as well this cycle. I only need to check the providence of the data:

  • Where do the POSCAR file come from, and could you check the licenses for them? (example)
  • Similarly, where do the .csv files in database originate from?
  • Are the .dat files in test/functional/python hand crafted?

(Resolved in offline discussion. Files with unclear providence were removed and new data and reference files will be generated)

@LecrisUT LecrisUT mentioned this pull request Jan 30, 2025
Merged
@LecrisUT LecrisUT enabled auto-merge (squash) January 30, 2025 13:11
LecrisUT and others added 3 commits January 30, 2025 15:28
@LecrisUT
Fix license to SPDX format
2c87c1d 
Signed-off-by: Cristian Le <cristian.le@mpsd.mpg.de>
@LecrisUT
Tighten python linking to main package
bbe01fa 
Signed-off-by: Cristian Le <cristian.le@mpsd.mpg.de>
@LecrisUT
Organize packit yaml
30b7520 
Signed-off-by: Cristian Le <git@lecris.dev>
@LecrisUT LecrisUT merged commit 705beb7 into spglib:develop Jan 30, 2025
57 checks passed
@LecrisUT LecrisUT deleted the spec-review branch January 30, 2025 15:21
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees

@LecrisUT LecrisUT

Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
1 participant
@LecrisUT