[Bug 1297425] Review Request: python-contexttimer - A timer context manager measuring time of the code block it contains
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Thu Jan 21 13:22:58 UTC 2016
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1297425
Parag AN(पराग) <panemade at gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #6 from Parag AN(पराग) <panemade at gmail.com> ---
Package Review
==============
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
1) directory ownership is missing therefore change
%{python2_sitelib}/%{pypi_name}/*
to
%{python2_sitelib}/%{pypi_name}
do same for python3 subpackage in %files
===== MUST items =====
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "GPL (v3 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 4 files have
unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/parag/1297425-python-contexttimer/licensecheck.txt
[ ]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[ ]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
Note: No known owner of /usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages,
/usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/contexttimer, /usr/lib/python3.5,
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/contexttimer
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python3.5/site-
packages, /usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/contexttimer,
/usr/lib/python3.5, /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/contexttimer
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 40960 bytes in 4 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
===== SHOULD items =====
Generic:
[x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
python3-contexttimer
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[-]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
===== EXTRA items =====
Generic:
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
Note: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
Rpmlint
-------
Checking: python-contexttimer-0.3.1-1.fc24.noarch.rpm
python3-contexttimer-0.3.1-1.fc24.noarch.rpm
python-contexttimer-0.3.1-1.fc24.src.rpm
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
Requires
--------
python3-contexttimer (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
python(abi)
python-contexttimer (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
python(abi)
Provides
--------
python3-contexttimer:
python3-contexttimer
python-contexttimer:
python-contexttimer
Source checksums
----------------
https://pypi.python.org/packages/source/c/contexttimer/contexttimer-0.3.1.tar.gz
:
CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package :
d4993b03c212d00a17754df1e9170b356f26647ceb631b651bd7a6c8090a9832
CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package :
d4993b03c212d00a17754df1e9170b356f26647ceb631b651bd7a6c8090a9832
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/brouberol/contexttimer/a5684a9e685486e9b633ed3b8da66d38a360bc77/LICENSE
:
CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package :
589ed823e9a84c56feb95ac58e7cf384626b9cbf4fda2a907bc36e103de1bad2
CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package :
589ed823e9a84c56feb95ac58e7cf384626b9cbf4fda2a907bc36e103de1bad2
Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20
APPROVED.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
More information about the package-review
mailing list