[Bug 1440968] New: Review Request: python-setuptools_scm_git_archive - A setuptools_scm plugin that adds support for git archives
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1440968
Bug ID: 1440968 Summary: Review Request: python-setuptools_scm_git_archive - A setuptools_scm plugin that adds support for git archives Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: athoscribeiro@gmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Spec URL: https://athoscr.fedorapeople.org/packaging/python-setuptools_scm_git_archive... SRPM URL: https://athoscr.fedorapeople.org/packaging/python-setuptools_scm_git_archive... koji build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=18915781
Description: This is a setuptools_scm plugin that adds support for git archives (for example the ones GitHub automatically generates).
Fedora Account System Username: athoscr
NOTE: python-setuptools_scm complains about not using pypi sources (even when using pypi sources). By refering to setuptools_scm documentation, I set an env variable where the package can get the version from. During the installation process it creates eggs for version ZERO of the package, which I removed after %%install.
python-setuptools_scm_git_archive.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) setuptools -> setup tools, setup-tools, toadstools python-setuptools_scm_git_archive.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) scm -> cm, scam, scum python-setuptools_scm_git_archive.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US setuptools -> setup tools, setup-tools, toadstools python-setuptools_scm_git_archive.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US scm -> cm, scam, scum 1 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1440968
Athos Ribeiro athoscribeiro@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |1440971
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1440971 [Bug 1440971] Review Request: python-pyclipper - Cython wrapper for the C++ translation of the Angus Johnson's Clipper library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1440968
Athos Ribeiro athoscribeiro@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |1440992
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1440992 [Bug 1440992] Review Request: python-booleanOperations - Boolean operations on paths
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1440968
Eduardo Mayorga e@mayorgalinux.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |e@mayorgalinux.com Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |e@mayorgalinux.com Flags| |fedora-review?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1440968
Elliott Sales de Andrade quantum.analyst@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |quantum.analyst@gmail.com
--- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade quantum.analyst@gmail.com --- Note that the pytest command was only added with 3.0.0, which is only in F26, so you'd need to modify the testing if you plan to import into F25.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1440968
--- Comment #2 from Athos Ribeiro athoscribeiro@gmail.com --- Oh, Thanks for pointing that out, Elliot. I had not noticed that!
Since f26 is almost out, I will just not build this package for f25, unless someone needs it there.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1440968
--- Comment #3 from Elliott Sales de Andrade quantum.analyst@gmail.com --- I'm not sure if anyone needs it, but the py.test command still exists in F26, so it should be straightforward to support it.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1440968
--- Comment #4 from Athos Ribeiro athoscribeiro@gmail.com --- Thank you for the input :)
I will use py.test before importing the package or in an updated spec if any other changes are needed during this review!
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1440968
Elliott Sales de Andrade quantum.analyst@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |needinfo?(e@mayorgalinux.co | |m)
--- Comment #5 from Elliott Sales de Andrade quantum.analyst@gmail.com --- Eduardo, are you going to finish this review?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1440968
Elliott Sales de Andrade quantum.analyst@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|e@mayorgalinux.com |nobody@fedoraproject.org Flags|fedora-review? | |needinfo?(e@mayorgalinux.co | |m) |
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1440968
Elliott Sales de Andrade quantum.analyst@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |quantum.analyst@gmail.com Flags| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #6 from Elliott Sales de Andrade quantum.analyst@gmail.com --- Taking the review, as it's been more than a week.
Fedora prefers dashes over underscores, but I guess since setuptools_scm already exists, this will be fine. You may want to use a %{_description} global to reduce the duplicate text.
You're missing Requires on setuptools_scm.
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: "*No copyright* MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "Unknown or generated". 7 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in review/1440968-python-setuptools_scm_git_archive/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. [?]: 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. [!]: 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. [!]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in python2-setuptools_scm_git_archive , python3-setuptools_scm_git_archive [?]: 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-setuptools_scm_git_archive-1.0-1.fc28.noarch.rpm python3-setuptools_scm_git_archive-1.0-1.fc28.noarch.rpm python-setuptools_scm_git_archive-1.0-1.fc28.src.rpm python2-setuptools_scm_git_archive.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) setuptools -> setup tools, setup-tools, toadstools python2-setuptools_scm_git_archive.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) scm -> cm, scam, scum python2-setuptools_scm_git_archive.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US setuptools -> setup tools, setup-tools, toadstools python2-setuptools_scm_git_archive.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US scm -> cm, scam, scum python3-setuptools_scm_git_archive.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) setuptools -> setup tools, setup-tools, toadstools python3-setuptools_scm_git_archive.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) scm -> cm, scam, scum python3-setuptools_scm_git_archive.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US setuptools -> setup tools, setup-tools, toadstools python3-setuptools_scm_git_archive.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US scm -> cm, scam, scum python-setuptools_scm_git_archive.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) setuptools -> setup tools, setup-tools, toadstools python-setuptools_scm_git_archive.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) scm -> cm, scam, scum python-setuptools_scm_git_archive.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US setuptools -> setup tools, setup-tools, toadstools python-setuptools_scm_git_archive.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US scm -> cm, scam, scum 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 12 warnings.
Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- python3-setuptools_scm_git_archive.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) setuptools -> setup tools, setup-tools, toadstools python3-setuptools_scm_git_archive.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) scm -> cm, scam, scum python3-setuptools_scm_git_archive.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US setuptools -> setup tools, setup-tools, toadstools python3-setuptools_scm_git_archive.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US scm -> cm, scam, scum python2-setuptools_scm_git_archive.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) setuptools -> setup tools, setup-tools, toadstools python2-setuptools_scm_git_archive.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) scm -> cm, scam, scum python2-setuptools_scm_git_archive.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US setuptools -> setup tools, setup-tools, toadstools python2-setuptools_scm_git_archive.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US scm -> cm, scam, scum 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 8 warnings.
Requires -------- python3-setuptools_scm_git_archive (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi)
python2-setuptools_scm_git_archive (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi)
Provides -------- python3-setuptools_scm_git_archive: python3-setuptools_scm_git_archive python3.6dist(setuptools-scm-git-archive) python3dist(setuptools-scm-git-archive)
python2-setuptools_scm_git_archive: python-setuptools_scm_git_archive python2-setuptools_scm_git_archive python2.7dist(setuptools-scm-git-archive) python2dist(setuptools-scm-git-archive)
Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/Changaco/setuptools_scm_git_archive/archive/1.0/setuptool... : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : a82b6a81995f5c54b2a4703387a425fe242edbd4d45dfb238976a977967ab224 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : a82b6a81995f5c54b2a4703387a425fe242edbd4d45dfb238976a977967ab224
Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1440968 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 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=1440968
--- Comment #7 from Athos Ribeiro athoscribeiro@gmail.com --- Hi Elliot,
You are right. Upstream did not add setuptools_scm as a dependency, so I did let that one slip. Thank you for getting that one.
It is fixed now and I will ping upstream about it. https://athoscr.fedorapeople.org/packaging/python-setuptools_scm_git_archive... SRPM URL: https://athoscr.fedorapeople.org/packaging/python-setuptools_scm_git_archive... Koji build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=21690404
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1440968
Elliott Sales de Andrade quantum.analyst@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |POST Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #8 from Elliott Sales de Andrade quantum.analyst@gmail.com --- Looks good to me.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1440968
--- Comment #9 from Athos Ribeiro athoscribeiro@gmail.com --- Thanks for the review!
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1440968
--- Comment #10 from Gwyn Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com --- (fedrepo-req-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-setuptools_scm_git_archive
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1440968
Athos Ribeiro athoscribeiro@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|POST |CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed| |2017-09-12 10:16:36
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
bugzilla＠redhat.com