[Bug 1382935] New: Review Request: python-visitor - A tiny python visitor implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1382935
Bug ID: 1382935 Summary: Review Request: python-visitor - A tiny python visitor implementation Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: david.hannequin@gmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Spec URL: https://hvad.fedorapeople.org/fedora/python-visitor/python-visitor.spec SRPM URL: https://hvad.fedorapeople.org/fedora/python-visitor/python-visitor-0.1.3-1.f...
Description: A tiny library to facilitate visitor. In fact, it is so small, you may just be better off copy and pasting the source straight into your project.
Fedora Account System Username: hvad
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1382935
David Hannequin david.hannequin@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-review?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1382935
David Hannequin david.hannequin@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1382935
Julien Enselme jujens@jujens.eu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |jujens@jujens.eu Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |jujens@jujens.eu Flags| |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Julien Enselme jujens@jujens.eu --- Package looks good. Approved. Side note: if you choose to get the sources from github, you'll be able to run tests on this package.
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: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "Unknown or generated". 2 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /tmp/1382935 -python-visitor/licensecheck.txt [X]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 2 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: 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]: 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]: 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: [-]: 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 python2-visitor , python3-visitor [?]: Package functions as described. [X]: Latest version is packaged. [X]: 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. [?]: 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: python2-visitor-0.1.3-1.fc26.noarch.rpm python3-visitor-0.1.3-1.fc26.noarch.rpm python-visitor-0.1.3-1.fc26.src.rpm python2-visitor.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) pythonic -> Python, python python3-visitor.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) pythonic -> Python, python 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- python2-visitor.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) pythonic -> Python, python python3-visitor.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) pythonic -> Python, python 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
Requires -------- python2-visitor (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi)
python3-visitor (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi)
Provides -------- python2-visitor: python-visitor python2-visitor python2.7dist(visitor) python2dist(visitor)
python3-visitor: python3-visitor python3.5dist(visitor) python3dist(visitor)
Source checksums ---------------- https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/v/visitor/visitor-0.1.3.tar.g... : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 2c737903b2b6864ebc6167eef7cf3b997126f1aa94bdf590f90f1436d23e480a CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 2c737903b2b6864ebc6167eef7cf3b997126f1aa94bdf590f90f1436d23e480a
Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1382935 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1382935
--- Comment #2 from Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/python-visitor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1382935
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |ON_QA
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- python-visitor-0.1.3-1.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-29501c3376
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1382935
--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- python-visitor-0.1.3-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-260a2acc98
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1382935
--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- python-visitor-0.1.3-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-784d83ab22
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1382935
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed| |2016-11-22 22:52:54
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- python-visitor-0.1.3-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1382935
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- python-visitor-0.1.3-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1382935
--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- python-visitor-0.1.3-1.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Red Hat Bugzilla