Take in fixes from @churchyard to modernize spec file

[smooge]

Pull request was downstream at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-ramalama/pull-request/2 and this will make it match with upstream. At that point we will be able to automate with packit.

Summary by Sourcery

Enhancements:

• Modernize the spec file by aligning it with upstream changes, including formatting adjustments and updates to build requirements.

[sourcery-ai]

Reviewer's Guide by Sourcery

This PR modernizes the spec file by adopting current RPM packaging best practices. The changes include updating package metadata formatting, simplifying conditional requirements, improving file handling through pyproject macros, and adding necessary package dependencies.

No diagrams generated as the changes look simple and do not need a visual representation.

File-Level Changes

Change	Details	Files
Improved package metadata and formatting	Renamed 'desc' global variable to 'summary' for better clarity Aligned package metadata fields for better readability Removed unnecessary debug_package directive	rpm/python-ramalama.spec
Updated build and runtime dependencies	Replaced golang-github-cpuguy83-md2man with go-md2man Added unconditional requirement for python-tqdm instead of conditional Added new dependency on python-omlmd package Removed conditional checks for Fedora 40	rpm/python-ramalama.spec
Modernized Python packaging macros usage	Added pyproject_buildrequires section Updated pyproject_save_files usage with -l flag Added pyproject_check_import for package verification Simplified files section using pyproject_files macro	rpm/python-ramalama.spec
Enhanced source preparation and documentation	Replaced forgesetup with forgeautosetup using -p1 flag Duplicated package description in Python subpackage for completeness Improved file section organization and clarity	rpm/python-ramalama.spec

---

Tips and commands

Interacting with Sourcery

• Trigger a new review: Comment @sourcery-ai review on the pull request.
• Continue discussions: Reply directly to Sourcery's review comments.
• Generate a GitHub issue from a review comment: Ask Sourcery to create an
  issue from a review comment by replying to it.
• Generate a pull request title: Write @sourcery-ai anywhere in the pull
  request title to generate a title at any time.
• Generate a pull request summary: Write @sourcery-ai summary anywhere in
  the pull request body to generate a PR summary at any time. You can also use
  this command to specify where the summary should be inserted.

Customizing Your Experience

Access your dashboard to:

• Enable or disable review features such as the Sourcery-generated pull request
  summary, the reviewer's guide, and others.
• Change the review language.
• Add, remove or edit custom review instructions.
• Adjust other review settings.

Getting Help

• Contact our support team for questions or feedback.
• Visit our documentation for detailed guides and information.
• Keep in touch with the Sourcery team by following us on X/Twitter, LinkedIn or GitHub.

[sourcery-ai]

Hey @smooge - I've reviewed your changes and they look great!

Here's what I looked at during the review

• 🟢 General issues: all looks good
• 🟢 Security: all looks good
• 🟢 Testing: all looks good
• 🟢 Complexity: all looks good
• 🟢 Documentation: all looks good

---

Sourcery is free for open source - if you like our reviews please consider sharing them ✨

• X
• Mastodon
• LinkedIn
• Facebook

_{Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment and I'll use the feedback to improve your reviews.}

[rhatdan]

Builds are failing on centos-stream because of missing requiements tdqm?

[rhatdan]

LGTM