Hi,

phodina <phodina@protonmail.com> writes:

> Hi Sarah!
>
> Are these fixes now compliant to upstream the patch?

It's pretty good.  I went ahead and made a few changes (attached below):
I tweaked the descriptions, I changed very-pretty-table to
veryprettytable so the python importer can find it in the future, I
changed pirate-get's propagated-inputs to inputs since it's an end-user
package, and I changed the license of pirate-get to AGPL-3.

* Package review checklist (WIP)
Lack of a check is not proof of noncompliance.

1. [X] Package builds (guix build package)
     [X] x86_64  [ ] aarch64  [ ] armhf     [ ] powerpc64le
     [ ] i686    [ ] i586     [ ] mips64le
2. [X] Build is reproducible (guix build --rounds=n package)
3. [X] Tests enabled (if available) or disabled with in-source comment
4. [X] No extraneous dependencies (guix size package)
5. [X] No unnecessary pre-built binaries/blobs
6. [X] Dependencies unvendored when available in Guix
7. [X] Cross-compile friendly (cc-for-target, patches with inputs)
8. [X] License matches source
9. [X] No problematic lints (guix lint package)
10. [X] Formatting follows guidelines
    - [X] Lines wrap at 80 characters
    - [X] Indentation passes etc/indent-code.el
    - [X] Two spaces used between sentences

For new packages:
1. [X] Source url is robust
   * mirror:// used with url-fetch when possible
   * No auto-generated archives from source repo (prefer cloning)
2. [X] Synopsis is short, descriptive, and meaningful to a wide audience
3. [X] Description is objective, takes 5-10 lines, uses full sentences,
   and provides the information users need to decide whether the
   software fits their needs.

I also gave it a spin, and it works fine as long as the SSL_CERT_DIR
environment variable is defined (I think that's beyond the scope of this
package). LGTM.

Thanks for your work!

--
Sarah