[Bug 2244587] New: Review Request: python-simple-websocket - Simple WebSocket server and client for Python

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

            Bug ID: 2244587
           Summary: Review Request: python-simple-websocket - Simple
                    WebSocket server and client for Python
           Product: Fedora
           Version: rawhide
          Hardware: All
                OS: Linux
            Status: NEW
         Component: Package Review
          Severity: medium
          Priority: medium
          Assignee: nobody(a)fedoraproject.org
          Reporter: manisandro(a)gmail.com
        QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
                CC: package-review(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
    Classification: Fedora



Spec URL: https://smani.fedorapeople.org/review/python-simple-websocket.spec
SRPM URL:
https://smani.fedorapeople.org/review/python-simple-websocket-1.0.0-1.src...
Description: Simple WebSocket server and client for Python
Fedora Account System Username: smani

Scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=107632064


-- 
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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...

[Bug 2244587] Review Request: python-simple-websocket - Simple WebSocket server and client for Python

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

Benson Muite <benson_muite(a)emailplus.org&gt; changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |benson_muite(a)emailplus.org
           Doc Type|---                         |If docs needed, set a value
              Flags|                            |fedora-review?
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
           Assignee|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org    |benson_muite(a)emailplus.org




-- 
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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

[Bug 2244587] Review Request: python-simple-websocket - Simple WebSocket server and client for Python

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

Fedora Review Service <fedora-review-bot(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                URL|                            |https://github.com/miguelgr
                   |                            |inberg/simple-websocket



--- Comment #1 from Fedora Review Service <fedora-review-bot(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; ---
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6539770
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-...

Please take a look if any issues were found.

---
This comment was created by the fedora-review-service
https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.


-- 
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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...

[Bug 2244587] Review Request: python-simple-websocket - Simple WebSocket server and client for Python

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587



--- Comment #2 from Benson Muite <benson_muite(a)emailplus.org&gt; ---
Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed


Issues:
=======
- Dist tag is present.


===== 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: "MIT License", "*No copyright* MIT License", "Unknown
or
     generated". 17 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
     licensecheck in /home/fedora/reviews/python-simple-
     websocket/2244587-python-simple-websocket/licensecheck.txt
[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.
[-]: 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.
[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: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[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]: The License field must be a valid SPDX expression.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[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]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

Python:
[-]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
     process.
[-]: 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]: Packages MUST NOT have dependencies (either build-time or runtime) on
     packages named with the unversioned python- prefix unless no properly
     versioned package exists. Dependencies on Python packages instead MUST
     use names beginning with python2- or python3- as appropriate.
[x]: Python packages must not contain %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep

===== SHOULD items =====

Generic:
[-]: 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).
[ ]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
     publishes signatures.
     Note: gpgverify is not used.
[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]: 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]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[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: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: python3-simple-websocket-1.0.0-1.noarch.rpm
          python-simple-websocket-1.0.0-1.src.rpm
================================================== rpmlint session starts
=================================================
rpmlint: 2.4.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmpu5oghia5')]
checks: 31, packages: 2

python3-simple-websocket.noarch: W: no-documentation
=================== 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 0
badness; has taken 8.8 s ==================




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
============================ rpmlint session starts
============================
rpmlint: 2.4.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
checks: 31, packages: 1

python3-simple-websocket.noarch: W: no-documentation
 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 0 badness; has taken
0.7 s 



Source checksums
----------------
https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/s/simple-websocket/simple-...
:
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     :
17d2c72f4a2bd85174a97e3e4c88b01c40c3f81b7b648b0cc3ce1305968928c8
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package :
17d2c72f4a2bd85174a97e3e4c88b01c40c3f81b7b648b0cc3ce1305968928c8


Requires
--------
python3-simple-websocket (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    python(abi)
    python3.11dist(wsproto)



Provides
--------
python3-simple-websocket:
    python-simple-websocket
    python3-simple-websocket
    python3.11-simple-websocket
    python3.11dist(simple-websocket)
    python3dist(simple-websocket)



Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2244587 -m fedora-38-x86_64
Buildroot used: fedora-38-x86_64
Active plugins: Python, Shell-api, Generic
Disabled plugins: Ruby, PHP, C/C++, Perl, R, SugarActivity, Java, fonts, Ocaml,
Haskell
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH

Comments:
a) Can documentation be built? Sphinx can generate man pages, but if html
is built, indicate bundled javascript files. Packaging rst files is also fine.
b) Can examples also be packaged as documentation?
c) Sources include an egg-info directory. Can this be removed in the prep
section?


-- 
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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...

[Bug 2244587] Review Request: python-simple-websocket - Simple WebSocket server and client for Python

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587



--- Comment #3 from Sandro Mani <manisandro(a)gmail.com&gt; ---
Spec URL: https://smani.fedorapeople.org/review/python-simple-websocket.spec
SRPM URL:
https://smani.fedorapeople.org/review/python-simple-websocket-1.0.0-2.fc4...

%changelog
* Tue Oct 17 2023 Sandro Mani <manisandro(a)gmail.com&gt; - 1.0.0-2
- Use GitHub source
- Builds docs
- Ship examples as docs

Scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=107661249


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...

[Bug 2244587] Review Request: python-simple-websocket - Simple WebSocket server and client for Python

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Review Service <fedora-review-bot(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; ---
Created attachment 1994343
  --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1994343&action=edit
The .spec file difference from Copr build 6539770 to 6540205


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...

[Bug 2244587] Review Request: python-simple-websocket - Simple WebSocket server and client for Python

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Review Service <fedora-review-bot(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; ---
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6540205
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-...

Please take a look if any issues were found.

---
This comment was created by the fedora-review-service
https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.


-- 
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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...

[Bug 2244587] Review Request: python-simple-websocket - Simple WebSocket server and client for Python

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

Ben Beasley <code(a)musicinmybrain.net&gt; changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |code(a)musicinmybrain.net



--- Comment #6 from Ben Beasley <code(a)musicinmybrain.net&gt; ---
(In reply to Benson Muite from comment #2)

Thank you for reviewing this!

>  a) Can documentation be built? Sphinx can generate man pages, but if
> html
>  is built, indicate bundled javascript files. Packaging rst files is also
>  fine. 
There are more problems than bundled JavaScript. At minimum, there are also
pre-minified JavaScript and CSS, and all kinds of issues with discarded license
texts. Discussion in bug 2006555 and
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[e-mail]....
I don’t believe it’s practical to package Sphinx-generated HTML documentation
in a way that withstands close scrutiny.

The PDF form as built in the latest submission is “probably OK.”

>  b) Can examples also be packaged as documentation? 
+1


>  c) Sources include an egg-info directory. Can this be removed in the
> prep
>  section? 
Why? It doesn’t do any harm. See bug 1825455, and in particular
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1825455#c2.

Note that metadata in an egg-info directory is not at all the same as the
almost entirely historical “binary eggs” that fedora-review warns about, which
would be like bundling wheels.

----

I see just ONE problem that *should* block the review: the -doc subpackage
needs to include its own copy of the license file (“%license LICENSE”).

----

A few small comments, none of which are actual *problems*.

You can write Source0: and Patch0: as Source: and Patch:, respectively. The
numbering isn’t needed.

You can simplify Source/Source0 from
 
https://github.com/miguelgrinberg/simple-websocket/archive/refs/tags/v%{v...
first by writing
 
https://github.com/miguelgrinberg/simple-websocket/archive/v%{version}/si...
which is equivalent but shorter, and then, if you like:
  %{url}/archive/v%{version}/simple-websocket-%{version}.tar.gz

You can, if you like, write each description’s text as “%{summary}.” to avoid
repetition.

While patching out coverage dependencies and using “%pyproject_buildrequires
-t” and “%tox” is perfectly reasonable, you might find it even simpler to add a
manual “BuildRequires: %{py3_dist pytest}”, then use “%pyproject_buildrequires”
and “%pytest”. The tox layer isn’t adding anything interesting in this package,
and it might be easier than maintaining the patch to remove coverage tools from
the test dependencies. Either approach seems sane, though.

I think you should drop the manual “BuildRequires: python3dist(sphinx)” and
instead add “%{?with_doc_pdf:-x docs}” to the %pyproject_buildrequires
invocation.

Looks just fine overall, though, except for the missing license file in -doc.

----

I am happy to co-maintain this, and to start on the engineio/socketio updates
once it is approved and imported.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...

[Bug 2244587] Review Request: python-simple-websocket - Simple WebSocket server and client for Python

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587



--- Comment #7 from Sandro Mani <manisandro(a)gmail.com&gt; ---
Spec URL: https://smani.fedorapeople.org/review/python-simple-websocket.spec
SRPM URL:
https://smani.fedorapeople.org/review/python-simple-websocket-1.0.0-2.fc4...

%changelog
* Wed Oct 18 2023 Sandro Mani <manisandro(a)gmail.com&gt; - 1.0.0-3
- Simplify source URLs
- Add LICENSE to -doc
- BR pytest directly, drop coverage patch


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...

[Bug 2244587] Review Request: python-simple-websocket - Simple WebSocket server and client for Python

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Review Service <fedora-review-bot(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; ---
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6541909
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-...

Please take a look if any issues were found.

---
This comment was created by the fedora-review-service
https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...

[Bug 2244587] Review Request: python-simple-websocket - Simple WebSocket server and client for Python

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

Ben Beasley <code(a)musicinmybrain.net&gt; changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Flags|                            |needinfo?(benson_muite@emai
                   |                            |lplus.org)




-- 
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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

[Bug 2244587] Review Request: python-simple-websocket - Simple WebSocket server and client for Python

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

Benson Muite <benson_muite(a)emailplus.org&gt; changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Flags|fedora-review?              |fedora-review+
                   |needinfo?(benson_muite@emai |
                   |lplus.org)                  |
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |POST



--- Comment #9 from Benson Muite <benson_muite(a)emailplus.org&gt; ---
Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed



===== 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: "Unknown or generated", "MIT License", "*No
copyright* MIT
     License". 30 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
     licensecheck in /home/fedora/2244587-python-simple-
     websocket/licensecheck.txt
[ ]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[ ]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[ ]: 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
[ ]: 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.
[ ]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: 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.
[ ]: 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: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[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]: The License field must be a valid SPDX expression.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[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 must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

Python:
[-]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
     Note: Cannot find any build in BUILD directory (--prebuilt option?)
[-]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
     process.
[-]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
     provide egg info.
[ ]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Packages MUST NOT have dependencies (either build-time or runtime) on
     packages named with the unversioned python- prefix unless no properly
     versioned package exists. Dependencies on Python packages instead MUST
     use names beginning with python2- or python3- as appropriate.
[x]: Python packages must not contain %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files

===== SHOULD items =====

Generic:
[ ]: 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).
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
     python3-simple-websocket
[ ]: Package functions as described.
[ ]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[ ]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
     publishes signatures.
     Note: gpgverify is not used.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[ ]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[ ]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
     files.
[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]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.

===== EXTRA items =====

Generic:
[!]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
     Note: Spec file as given by url is not the same as in SRPM (see
     attached diff).
     See: (this test has no URL)
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: python3-simple-websocket-1.0.0-2.fc40.noarch.rpm
          python-simple-websocket-doc-1.0.0-2.fc40.noarch.rpm
          python-simple-websocket-1.0.0-2.fc40.src.rpm
============================ rpmlint session starts
============================
rpmlint: 2.4.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmpzqbbbj30')]
checks: 31, packages: 3

python3-simple-websocket.noarch: W: no-documentation
 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 0 badness; has taken
0.3 s 




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
============================ rpmlint session starts
============================
rpmlint: 2.4.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
checks: 31, packages: 2

python3-simple-websocket.noarch: W: no-documentation
 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 0 badness; has taken
0.1 s 



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/miguelgrinberg/simple-websocket/archive/v1.0.0/simple-...
:
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     :
fb99a26c97146c806fa6fd3e074fb4d0e84d6706c45e6c728b80188b6eddd26c
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package :
fb99a26c97146c806fa6fd3e074fb4d0e84d6706c45e6c728b80188b6eddd26c


Requires
--------
python3-simple-websocket (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    python(abi)
    python3.12dist(wsproto)

python-simple-websocket-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):



Provides
--------
python3-simple-websocket:
    python-simple-websocket
    python3-simple-websocket
    python3.12-simple-websocket
    python3.12dist(simple-websocket)
    python3dist(simple-websocket)

python-simple-websocket-doc:
    python-simple-websocket-doc



Diff spec file in url and in SRPM
---------------------------------
---
/home/fedora/2244587-python-simple-websocket/srpm/python-simple-websocket.spec 
    2023-10-26 16:59:15.200618841 +0000
+++
/home/fedora/2244587-python-simple-websocket/srpm-unpacked/python-simple-websocket.spec
    2023-10-17 00:00:00.000000000 +0000
@@ -7,5 +7,5 @@
 Name:           python-simple-websocket
 Version:        1.0.0
-Release:        3%{?dist}
+Release:        2%{?dist}
 Summary:        Simple WebSocket server and client for Python

@@ -13,8 +13,11 @@
 License:        MIT
 URL:            https://github.com/miguelgrinberg/simple-websocket
-Source:         %{url}/archive/v%{version}/simple-websocket-%{version}.tar.gz
+Source0:       
https://github.com/miguelgrinberg/simple-websocket/archive/refs/tags/v%{v...
+
+# Patch out test coverage analysis
+# https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_linters
+Patch0:         omit-coverage-tests.patch

 BuildRequires:  python3-devel
-BuildRequires:  %{py3_dist pytest}

 # Documentation
@@ -50,5 +53,5 @@

 %generate_buildrequires
-%pyproject_buildrequires
+%pyproject_buildrequires -t


@@ -77,5 +80,4 @@

 %files doc
-%license LICENSE
 %doc CHANGES.md
 %doc README.md
@@ -87,9 +89,4 @@

 %changelog
-* Wed Oct 18 2023 Sandro Mani <manisandro(a)gmail.com&gt; - 1.0.0-3
-- Simplify source URLs
-- Add LICENSE to -doc
-- BR pytest directly, drop coverage patch
-
 * Tue Oct 17 2023 Sandro Mani <manisandro(a)gmail.com&gt; - 1.0.0-2
 - Use GitHub source


Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2244587
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-aarch64
Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: C/C++, R, SugarActivity, Perl, PHP, Haskell, fonts, Java,
Ocaml
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH

Comments:
a) 
$ rpm -qL python3-simple-websocket-1.0.0-2.fc40.noarch.rpm 
/usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/simple_websocket-1.0.0.dist-info/LICENSE
/usr/share/licenses/python3-simple-websocket/LICENSE
$ rpm -qL python-simple-websocket-doc-1.0.0-2.fc40.noarch.rpm

Please change last section from:
%files -n python3-simple-websocket -f %{pyproject_files}
%license LICENSE


%files doc
%doc CHANGES.md
%doc README.md
%if %{with doc_pdf}
%doc docs/_build/latex/simple-websocket.pdf
%endif
%doc examples/

to
%files -n python3-simple-websocket -f %{pyproject_files}
%doc README.md

%files doc
%license LICENSE
%doc CHANGES.md
%if %{with doc_pdf}
%doc docs/_build/latex/simple-websocket.pdf
%endif
%doc examples/


because the doc package does not require the main package and should have
license information.
and the README will be helpful as minimal documentation when the main package
is installed without
the doc package.  You may optionally choose to put CHANGES.md with the main
package.
b) Approved.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...

[Bug 2244587] Review Request: python-simple-websocket - Simple WebSocket server and client for Python

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions
<fedora-admin-xmlrpc(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; ---
The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-simple-websocket


-- 
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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...

[Bug 2244587] Review Request: python-simple-websocket - Simple WebSocket server and client for Python

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

Sandro Mani <manisandro(a)gmail.com&gt; changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Resolution|---                         |RAWHIDE
              Flags|                            |needinfo?(code@musicinmybra
                   |                            |in.net)
             Status|POST                        |CLOSED
        Last Closed|                            |2023-10-27 20:54:33



--- Comment #11 from Sandro Mani <manisandro(a)gmail.com&gt; ---
Thanks for the review!

@code(a)musicinmybrain.net I've added you as admin


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...

[Bug 2244587] Review Request: python-simple-websocket - Simple WebSocket server and client for Python

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

Ben Beasley <code(a)musicinmybrain.net&gt; changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Blocks|                            |2238547





Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2238547
[Bug 2238547] python-engineio-4.8.0 is available
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

[Bug 2244587] Review Request: python-simple-websocket - Simple WebSocket server and client for Python

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587



--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; ---
FEDORA-2023-d94b73f2f7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-d94b73f2f7


-- 
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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...

[Bug 2244587] Review Request: python-simple-websocket - Simple WebSocket server and client for Python

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587



--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; ---
FEDORA-2023-00da1fa0ca has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-00da1fa0ca


-- 
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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...

[Bug 2244587] Review Request: python-simple-websocket - Simple WebSocket server and client for Python

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

Ben Beasley <code(a)musicinmybrain.net&gt; changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Flags|needinfo?(code@musicinmybra |
                   |in.net)                     |




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

[Bug 2244587] Review Request: python-simple-websocket - Simple WebSocket server and client for Python

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587



--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; ---
FEDORA-2023-d94b73f2f7 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh
--advisory=FEDORA-2023-d94b73f2f7`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-d94b73f2f7

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...

[Bug 2244587] Review Request: python-simple-websocket - Simple WebSocket server and client for Python

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587



--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; ---
FEDORA-2023-00da1fa0ca has been pushed to the Fedora 38 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh
--advisory=FEDORA-2023-00da1fa0ca`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-00da1fa0ca

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...

[Bug 2244587] Review Request: python-simple-websocket - Simple WebSocket server and client for Python

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Resolution|RAWHIDE                     |ERRATA



--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; ---
FEDORA-2023-d94b73f2f7 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...

[Bug 2244587] Review Request: python-simple-websocket - Simple WebSocket server and client for Python

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587



--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; ---
FEDORA-2023-00da1fa0ca has been pushed to the Fedora 38 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587

Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...