[Bug 2091916] New: Review Request: python-oscrypto - Compiler-free Python crypto library backed by the OS

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2091916

            Bug ID: 2091916
           Summary: Review Request: python-oscrypto - Compiler-free Python
                    crypto library backed by the OS
           Product: Fedora
           Version: rawhide
          Hardware: All
                OS: Linux
            Status: NEW
         Component: Package Review
          Severity: medium
          Priority: medium
          Assignee: nobody(a)fedoraproject.org
          Reporter: dominik(a)greysector.net
        QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
                CC: package-review(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
    Classification: Fedora



Spec URL:
https://rathann.fedorapeople.org/review/python-oscrypto/python-oscrypto.spec
SRPM URL:
https://rathann.fedorapeople.org/review/python-oscrypto/python-oscrypto-1...
Description:
A compilation-free, always up-to-date encryption library for Python that
works on Windows, OS X, Linux and BSD. Supports the following versions of
Python: 2.6, 2.7, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, 3.10 and pypy.

Fedora Account System Username: rathann


-- 
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=2091916

[Bug 2091916] Review Request: python-oscrypto - Compiler-free Python crypto library backed by the OS

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2091916

Jakub Kadlčík <jkadlcik(a)redhat.com&gt; changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Doc Type|---                         |If docs needed, set a value
              Flags|                            |fedora-review?
           Assignee|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org    |jkadlcik(a)redhat.com
                 CC|                            |jkadlcik(a)redhat.com



--- Comment #1 from Jakub Kadlčík <jkadlcik(a)redhat.com&gt; ---
Hello Dominik,
thank you for the package.

I am trying to build the package but it fails because of a missing
dependency on python3-pytest. I tried to add it but then it still
doesn't build because of some failed tests. It will need some
debugging.


>  # main package is archful to run tests everywhere but produces noarch
> packages
>  %global debug_package %{nil} 
Every python package that I have seen so far, had 

    BuildArch: noarch

instead of this. Can you please help me understand what is different
in this case and why we want to do it this way?


>  A compilation-free, always up-to-date encryption library for Python
> that\
>  works on Windows, OS X, Linux and BSD. Supports the following versions of\
>  Python: 2.6, 2.7, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, 3.10 and pypy. 
While I am happy that the description isn't simply copy-pasted
summary, it IMHO isn't very helpful. When installing the package for
Fedora XX, it is given that it works on Linux and the python version
provided by the repos.

I think it would be more helpful to condense here the Features section
from readme.md or to use the description (or its modified version)
from setup.py.


-- 
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=2091916

[Bug 2091916] Review Request: python-oscrypto - Compiler-free Python crypto library backed by the OS

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2091916



--- Comment #2 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <dominik(a)greysector.net&gt;
---
(In reply to Jakub Kadlčík from comment #1)
>  I am trying to build the package but it fails because of a missing
>  dependency on python3-pytest. I tried to add it but then it still
>  doesn't build because of some failed tests. It will need some
>  debugging. 
Fixed.

>  > # main package is archful to run tests everywhere but produces
> noarch packages
>  > %global debug_package %{nil}
>  
>  Every python package that I have seen so far, had 
>  
>      BuildArch: noarch
>  
>  instead of this. Can you please help me understand what is different
>  in this case and why we want to do it this way? 
In my opinion, other packages should do the same. If the main package is noarch
then it gets built on only one (random) arch and the tests run on only one arch
instead of all Fedora supported ones.

[...]
>  I think it would be more helpful to condense here the Features
> section
>  from readme.md or to use the description (or its modified version)
>  from setup.py. 
Fixed.

Spec URL:
https://rathann.fedorapeople.org/review/python-oscrypto/python-oscrypto.spec
SRPM URL:
https://rathann.fedorapeople.org/review/python-oscrypto/python-oscrypto-1...

* Thu Jun 29 2023 Dominik Mierzejewski <dominik(a)greysector.net&gt; 1.3.0-2
- use pyproject macros and drop explicit BR: on setuptools
- improve description
- run only non-network tests


-- 
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=2091916

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

[Bug 2091916] Review Request: python-oscrypto - Compiler-free Python crypto library backed by the OS

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2091916

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

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                URL|                            |https://github.com/wbond/os
                   |                            |crypto



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Review Service <fedora-review-bot(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; ---
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6125887
(failed)

Build log:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-...

Please make sure the package builds successfully at least for Fedora Rawhide.

- If the build failed for unrelated reasons (e.g. temporary network
  unavailability), please ignore it.
- If the build failed because of missing BuildRequires, please make sure they
  are listed in the "Depends On" field


---
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=2091916

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

[Bug 2091916] Review Request: python-oscrypto - Compiler-free Python crypto library backed by the OS

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2091916



--- Comment #4 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <dominik(a)greysector.net&gt;
---
Spec URL:
https://rathann.fedorapeople.org/review/python-oscrypto/python-oscrypto.spec
SRPM URL:
https://rathann.fedorapeople.org/review/python-oscrypto/python-oscrypto-1...

Now with the missing python3-pydist dependency added for %check.


-- 
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=2091916

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

[Bug 2091916] Review Request: python-oscrypto - Compiler-free Python crypto library backed by the OS

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2091916



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Review Service <fedora-review-bot(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; ---
Created attachment 1973183
  --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1973183&action=edit
The .spec file difference from Copr build 6125887 to 6126023


-- 
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=2091916

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

[Bug 2091916] Review Request: python-oscrypto - Compiler-free Python crypto library backed by the OS

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2091916



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Review Service <fedora-review-bot(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; ---
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6126023
(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=2091916

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

[Bug 2091916] Review Request: python-oscrypto - Compiler-free Python crypto library backed by the OS

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2091916



--- Comment #7 from Jakub Kadlčík <jkadlcik(a)redhat.com&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: "MIT License", "Unknown or generated", "*No
copyright* MIT
     License". 225 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
     licensecheck in /home/jkadlcik/git/FedoraReview/2091916-python-
     oscrypto/licensecheck.txt
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[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.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 13963 bytes in 1 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]: 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]: 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]: 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.
[?]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[x]: %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: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: python3-oscrypto-1.3.0-2.fc39.noarch.rpm
          python-oscrypto-1.3.0-2.fc39.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/tmpls3lmggh')]
checks: 31, packages: 2

============================================================================= 2
packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 badness; has taken
0.9 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

 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 badness; has taken
0.2 s



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/wbond/oscrypto/archive/1.3.0/oscrypto-1.3.0.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     :
6daf845e07e3883926a5ceecd6b4f73d23841abc2769f682da79bf12291fc1af
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package :
6daf845e07e3883926a5ceecd6b4f73d23841abc2769f682da79bf12291fc1af


Requires
--------
python3-oscrypto (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    python(abi)
    python3.11dist(asn1crypto)



Provides
--------
python3-oscrypto:
    python-oscrypto
    python3-oscrypto
    python3.11-oscrypto
    python3.11dist(oscrypto)
    python3dist(oscrypto)



Generated by fedora-review 0.9.0 (6761b6c) last change: 2022-08-23
Command line :try-fedora-review -b 2091916
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Python, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: Haskell, Java, fonts, PHP, C/C++, Ocaml, SugarActivity, R,
Perl, Ruby
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH


-- 
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=2091916

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

[Bug 2091916] Review Request: python-oscrypto - Compiler-free Python crypto library backed by the OS

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2091916

Jakub Kadlčík <jkadlcik(a)redhat.com&gt; changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Flags|fedora-review?              |fedora-review+




-- 
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=2091916

[Bug 2091916] Review Request: python-oscrypto - Compiler-free Python crypto library backed by the OS

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2091916



--- Comment #8 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-oscrypto


-- 
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=2091916

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

[Bug 2091916] Review Request: python-oscrypto - Compiler-free Python crypto library backed by the OS

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2091916

Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <dominik(a)greysector.net&gt; changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |CLOSED
         Resolution|---                         |RAWHIDE
   Fixed In Version|                            |python-oscrypto-1.3.0-3.fc3
                   |                            |9
        Last Closed|                            |2023-07-07 12:03:21




-- 
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=2091916