5:41 a.m.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=850750
Bug ID: 850750
QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
Severity: medium
Version: rawhide
Priority: medium
CC: notting(a)redhat.com,
package-review(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Assignee: nobody(a)fedoraproject.org
Summary: Review Request: python-warlock - Python object model
built on top of JSON schema
Regression: ---
Story Points: ---
Classification: Fedora
OS: Linux
Reporter: apevec(a)gmail.com
Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Hardware: All
Mount Type: ---
Status: NEW
Component: Package Review
Product: Fedora
Spec URL: http://apevec.fedorapeople.org/python-warlock.spec
SRPM URL: http://apevec.fedorapeople.org/python-warlock-0.4.0-1.fc16.src.rpm
Description: Build self-validating python objects using JSON schemas
Fedora Account System Username: apevec
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
5:47 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 850750] Review Request: python-warlock - Python object model built on top of JSON schema
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=850750
--- Comment #1 from Alan Pevec <apevec(a)gmail.com> ---
rpmlint output:
python-warlock.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US schemas ->
schema, sachems, schemes
Given that description is taken from pypi and written by the author, presumably
en_US native speaker, I'd waive this
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
6:10 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 850750] Review Request: python-warlock - Python object model built on top of JSON schema
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=850750
--- Comment #2 from Alan Pevec <apevec(a)gmail.com> ---
Spec URL: http://apevec.fedorapeople.org/python-warlock.spec
SRPM URL: http://apevec.fedorapeople.org/python-warlock-0.4.0-2.fc16.src.rpm
Updated spec:
* Wed Aug 22 2012 Alan Pevec <apevec(a)redhat.com> 0.4.0-2
- Add missing build requirement
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
6:20 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 850750] Review Request: python-warlock - Python object model built on top of JSON schema
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=850750
Matthias Runge <mrunge(a)matthias-runge.de> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC| |mrunge(a)matthias-runge.de
Assignee|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |mrunge(a)matthias-runge.de
Flags| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #3 from Matthias Runge <mrunge(a)matthias-runge.de> ---
Package Review
==============
Key:
- = N/A
x = Pass
! = Fail
? = Not evaluated
==== Generic ====
[x]: EXTRA Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: EXTRA Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
[x]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at
least one supported primary architecture.
[x]: MUST %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4
Note: Note: defattr macros not found. They would be needed for EPEL5
[x]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[-]: MUST Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: MUST Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: MUST Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: MUST Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: MUST Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: MUST Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: MUST Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: MUST Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[x]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
Note: rm -rf would be needed if support for EPEL5 is required
[x]: MUST Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[x]: MUST 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 %doc.
[!]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. No licenses
found. Please check the source files for licenses manually.
[x]: MUST Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: MUST Package is named using only allowed ascii characters.
[x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package does not generate any conflict.
Note: Package contains no Conflicts: tag(s)
[x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: MUST If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: MUST Package installs properly.
[x]: MUST Package is not relocatable.
[x]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: MUST Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: MUST Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: MUST Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[-]: MUST Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: SHOULD Buildroot is not present
Note: Unless packager wants to package for EPEL5 this is fine
[x]: SHOULD Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
Note: Clean would be needed if support for EPEL5 is required
[x]: SHOULD 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]: SHOULD Dist tag is present.
[x]: SHOULD No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin,
/usr/sbin.
[x]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q
--requires).
[?]: SHOULD Package functions as described.
[x]: SHOULD Latest version is packaged.
[x]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from
upstream.
[x]: SHOULD SourceX tarball generation or download is documented.
[!]: SHOULD SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}.
Note: Source0 (warlock-0.4.0.tar.gz)
[x]: SHOULD SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: SHOULD Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: SHOULD Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[!]: SHOULD %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: SHOULD Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[x]: SHOULD Spec use %global instead of %define.
Issues:
[!]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. No licenses
found. Please check the source files for licenses manually.
See:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#ValidLicenseS...
Rpmlint
-------
Checking: python-warlock-0.4.0-2.fc19.src.rpm
python-warlock-0.4.0-2.fc19.noarch.rpm
python-warlock.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US schemas -> schema,
sachems, schemes
python-warlock.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US schemas ->
schema, sachems, schemes
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
Cannot parse rpmlint output:
Requires
--------
python-warlock-0.4.0-2.fc19.noarch.rpm (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
python(abi) = 2.7
python-jsonschema
Provides
--------
python-warlock-0.4.0-2.fc19.noarch.rpm:
python-warlock = 0.4.0-2.fc19
MD5-sum check
-------------
http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/w/warlock/warlock-0.4.0.tar.gz :
CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package :
5f0f62041abe195990bc64d9be09732ff24aaaadfceddc7038108339ea151a14
CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package :
5f0f62041abe195990bc64d9be09732ff24aaaadfceddc7038108339ea151a14
Generated by fedora-review 0.2.2 (9f8c0e5) last change: 2012-08-09
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 850750
OK, you should run checks:
To do that, add
BuildRequires: python-jsonschema
%check
%{__python} setup.py test
I guess, that can also be done during import.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
6:21 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 850750] Review Request: python-warlock - Python object model built on top of JSON schema
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=850750
Matthias Runge <mrunge(a)matthias-runge.de> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Matthias Runge <mrunge(a)matthias-runge.de> ---
I forgot to add:
Package Approved
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
6:34 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 850750] Review Request: python-warlock - Python object model built on top of JSON schema
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=850750
Alan Pevec <apevec(a)gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |NEW
Flags| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #5 from Alan Pevec <apevec(a)gmail.com> ---
New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: python-warlock
Short Description: Python object model built on top of JSON schema
Owners: apevec pbrady mrunge
Branches: f18 f17 f16 el6
InitialCC:
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
7:28 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 850750] Review Request: python-warlock - Python object model built on top of JSON schema
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=850750
--- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla <limburgher(a)gmail.com> ---
Git done (by process-git-requests).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
9:24 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 850750] Review Request: python-warlock - Python object model built on top of JSON schema
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=850750
Alan Pevec <apevec(a)gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Fixed In Version| |python-warlock-0.4.0-2.fc18
Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE
Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs?
Last Closed| |2012-08-22 10:24:36
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
9:26 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 850750] Review Request: python-warlock - Python object model built on top of JSON schema
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=850750
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> ---
python-warlock-0.4.0-2.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-warlock-0.4.0-2.fc18
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
9:33 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 850750] Review Request: python-warlock - Python object model built on top of JSON schema
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=850750
--- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla <limburgher(a)gmail.com> ---
Unsetting cvs flag.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
9:08 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 850750] Review Request: python-warlock - Python object model built on top of JSON schema
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=850750
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> ---
python-warlock-0.4.0-2.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-warlock-0.4.0-2.fc17
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
12:32 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 850750] Review Request: python-warlock - Python object model built on top of JSON schema
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=850750
Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution|NEXTRELEASE |ERRATA
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> ---
python-warlock-0.4.0-2.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
4:59 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 850750] Review Request: python-warlock - Python object model built on top of JSON schema
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=850750
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> ---
python-warlock-0.4.0-2.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 stable repository.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
10:25 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 850750] Review Request: python-warlock - Python object model built on top of JSON schema
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=850750
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> ---
python-warlock-0.4.0-2.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-warlock-0.4.0-2.el6
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
4261
days inactive
4304
days old
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
13 comments
1 participants
participants (1)
-
Red Hat Bugzilla