[Bug 2126738] New: Review Request: python-typepy - python library for variable type checker/validator/converter
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2126738
Bug ID: 2126738 Summary: Review Request: python-typepy - python library for variable type checker/validator/converter Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: kkula@redhat.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/karolinku/python-typepy-sources/main/pytho... SRPM URL: https://github.com/karolinku/python-typepy-sources/raw/main/python-typepy-1.... Description: python library for variable type checker/validator/converter at a run time Fedora Account System Username: karolinku
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2126738
Sandro gui1ty@penguinpee.nl changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |gui1ty@penguinpee.nl
--- Comment #1 from Sandro gui1ty@penguinpee.nl --- Initial review looks good. There are a few minor issues that need to be addressed.
Package Review ==============
Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed
Issues ======
python3-typepy.noarch: W: summary-not-capitalized python library for variable type checker/validator/converter at a run time. python3-typepy.noarch: W: summary-ended-with-dot python library for variable type checker/validator/converter at a run time. python3-typepy.noarch: E: no-description-tag
These are self-explanatory. The spec file contains a %description tag, but '%description -n python3-%{pypi_name}' is empty. The description could be expanded, but upstream does not provide much more information in their README.rst than the summary.
===== 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. [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. ^^^ There is a doc directory in the sources. I haven't checked, yet, if the documentation is to be generated, but this should be in %doc, possibly in a separate documentation sub-package.
[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 [?]: 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 10240 bytes in 1 files. ^^^ This depends on the handling of the doc directory mentioned above.
[!]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines ^^^ See rpmlint error and warnings under Issues above
[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]: 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: [-]: 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. [?]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: %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: [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 ------- Cannot parse rpmlint output:
Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.2.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml checks: 32, packages: 1
python3-typepy.noarch: W: summary-not-capitalized python library for variable type checker/validator/converter at a run time. python3-typepy.noarch: W: summary-ended-with-dot python library for variable type checker/validator/converter at a run time. python3-typepy.noarch: E: no-description-tag 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings, 1 badness; has taken 0.1 s
Source checksums ---------------- https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/t/typepy/typepy-1.2.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 96b4c50151ffaca025b7202cdd4e84987ca058f4d6cf1aad0d9c82226961455e CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 96b4c50151ffaca025b7202cdd4e84987ca058f4d6cf1aad0d9c82226961455e
Requires -------- python3-typepy (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): (python3.11dist(mbstrdecoder) < 2~~ with python3.11dist(mbstrdecoder) >= 1) python(abi) python3-mbstrdecoder
Provides -------- python3-typepy: python-typepy python3-typepy python3.11-typepy python3.11dist(typepy) python3dist(typepy)
Generated by fedora-review 0.9.0 (6761b6c) last change: 2022-08-23 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2126738 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Python, Shell-api, Generic Disabled plugins: Haskell, SugarActivity, fonts, Java, R, Perl, Ocaml, C/C++, PHP Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2126738
--- Comment #2 from kkula@redhat.com --- Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/karolinku/python-typepy-sources/main/pytho... SRPM URL: https://github.com/karolinku/python-typepy-sources/raw/main/python-typepy-1....
Hello,
I fixed all rpmlint issues, but there is a problem with creating documentation as subpackage. *Configuration error: config directory doesn't contain a conf.py file* The conf.py file is not provided by project maintainer in tarball, only the summary: https://github.com/thombashi/typepy/blob/v1.2.0/setup.py#L34-L35.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2126738
--- Comment #3 from Sandro gui1ty@penguinpee.nl --- (In reply to kkula from comment #2)
I fixed all rpmlint issues, but there is a problem with creating documentation as subpackage. *Configuration error: config directory doesn't contain a conf.py file* The conf.py file is not provided by project maintainer in tarball, only the summary: https://github.com/thombashi/typepy/blob/v1.2.0/setup.py#L34-L35.
I'm not quite sure I follow. I see a conf.py in docs/ on GitHub.
Since the documentation is provided by Sphinx, it should just be:
%build ... pushd docs make foo make bar popd
I just recently did that for a package now in review. Take a look at https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/gui1ty/neuro-sig/fedora-r... for some inspiration, maybe.
With all the minor rpmlint issues fixed, docs is the only item still open. I'll try a build from source myself, if I get the time. Maybe there's something I missed in your explanation. Maybe now, since Koji is down. ;-)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2126738
--- Comment #4 from kkula@redhat.com --- The issue is that there is no documentation included in tarball. There is only in source code, but this package is basing on tarball.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2126738
Sandro gui1ty@penguinpee.nl changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #5 from Sandro gui1ty@penguinpee.nl --- Sorry about the confusion. I must have been looking at the source on GitHub.
Version 1.0.3 was released about a month ago. Please update. While doing so, consider changing 'Source0' to '%{pypi_source %{pypi_name}}'.
Provided the update doesn't break anything, this package is APPROVED.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2126738
--- Comment #6 from Sandro gui1ty@penguinpee.nl --- (In reply to Sandro from comment #5)
Sorry about the confusion. I must have been looking at the source on GitHub.
The tarball on GitHub does provide docs/. I may have been looking at that. But the latest release has not been made available on GitHub, yet.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2126738
--- Comment #7 from kkula@redhat.com --- Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/karolinku/python-typepy-sources/main/pytho... SRPM URL: https://github.com/karolinku/python-typepy-sources/raw/main/python-typepy-1....
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2126738
--- Comment #8 from Sandro gui1ty@penguinpee.nl --- Thanks. Package has already been approved. Not changing that. ;)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2126738
--- Comment #9 from Gwyn Ciesla gwync@protonmail.com --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-typepy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2126738
Sandro gui1ty@penguinpee.nl changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |needinfo?(kkula@redhat.com)
--- Comment #10 from Sandro gui1ty@penguinpee.nl --- Ping? It appears the package has made it into rawhide. If this is all set and done, please close the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2126738
kkula@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |COMPLETED Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Last Closed| |2023-04-11 11:25:40
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2126738
kkula@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?(kkula@redhat.com) |
--- Comment #11 from kkula@redhat.com --- thanks, bug closed.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
bugzilla＠redhat.com